HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6982/2018
Pankaj Sharma S/o Shri Suresh Kumar Sharma, R/o E-727, Near
Amrapali Circle, Behind Gupta Store, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Sneha Sharma D/o Umesh Bihari Sharma, R/o 264/154,
Sector 26, Pratap Nagar, Near Nri Circle, Jaipur.
—-Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Sumit Khandelwal
For Respondent(s) : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek PP
Mr. Pankaj Jain for respondent no.2.
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA
-/Order/-
21/01/2019
The present petition has been filed under Section 482
Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings arising out of case FIR
No.127/2017 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City
(East) for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC.
In the present case, quashing of FIR has been sought
on the basis of compromise.
Sneha Sharma, respondent no.2 is present in the court.
She has been identified by her counsel Mr. Pankaj Jain.
Sneha Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that on
17.1.2016 she was married with petitioner as per Hindu customs
and rites. It is submitted that due to difference of opinion, she was
compelled to lodge the impugned FIR.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-6982/2018]
Learned counsel for the respondent no.2 has submitted
that due to intervention of respectables, elders of the family and
common relations, the matrimonial dispute has been amicably
resolved.
Sneha Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that the
petitioner had agreed to pay Rs.Four Lakhs and Fifty Thousands
towards Stridhan, expenses on marriage, permanent alimony and
cost of litigation etc.
Sneha Sharma complainant/respondent no.2 has stated
that she filed a divorce petition and in the same ex-parte decree of
divorce has been granted.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that
the petitioner has accepted the ex-parte decree of divorce and he
has decided not to challenge the same.
Learned counsel for the parties have vouchsafed the
factum of compromise and has also drawn attention of this Court
to the joint application Annexure-2 filed by the parties before the
court of Magistrate. Learned counsel for the parties have
submitted that vide order dated 25.10.2018, the trial court
accepted the compromise qua offence under Section 406 IPC as
the said offence is compoundable. It is further contended that the
trial court rejected the compromise qua offence under Section
498A IPC on the ground that the said offence is non-
compoundable.
Sneha Sharma, respondent no.2 has submitted that she
has received Rs. Four Lakhs and Fifty Thousands as agreed to be
paid by petitioner. She prayed that the impugned FIR be quashed
as she no longer intends to pursue the same.
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-6982/2018]
The learned counsel for the parties have jointly relied
upon B.S. Joshi Ors. vs. State of Haryana Anr., 2003
Cri.L.J. 2028, to contend that this Court while exercising
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in furtherance of interest of
justice in matrimonial dispute may bring families at peace by
quashing FIR.
On the prayer made by the learned counsel for the
parties, in view of the judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra),
relied by the parties, the present petition is accepted and
impugned FIR along with all its subsequent proceedings is
quashed.
(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
Mak/-
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
