SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Parveen Kumar Sharma, Son Of Sh. … vs State Of Rajasthan on 30 August, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4298/2018

1. Parveen Kumar Sharma, Son Of Sh. Ram Swaroop, R/o
Mohalla Manpura Behror, Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

2. Ram Swaroop, S/o Late Budh Ram, R/o Shakti Vihar Colony,
Behror, Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

3. Smt. Pushpa Devi, W/o Sh. Ram Sawroop, R/o Shakti Vihar
Colony, Behror, Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

—-Petitioners

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Rajasthan

2. Smt. Ritu D/o Sh. Surender Kumar Sharma, R/o Mohalla
Manpura Behror, Tehsil Behror, Distt. Alwar, Rajasthan.

—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Abhi Goyal
For Respondent(s) : Mr. M.S. Shekhawat
For the State : Mrs. Meenakshi Pareek, P.P.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

/ Order

30/08/2018
Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482

Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of impugned F.I.R. No.532 of 2012 registered

at Police Station Behrod District Alwar for offences punishable under

Sections 498-A and 406/34 of Indian Penal Code.

In the present case, quashing of impugned F.I.R. has been

sought on the basis of compromise affected between the parties.

Mr. Abhi Goyal, ld. counsel appearing for the petitioners and

Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, ld. counsel appearing for the respondent No.2,

have jointly submitted that the matrimonial dispute has been amicably

resolved between the parties.

(2 of 3) [CRLMP-4298/2018]

Smt. Ritu, complainant/respondent No.2 is present in

person before this Court. She has been identified by her Counsel Mr.

M.S. Shekhawat.

Smt. Ritu, complainant/respondent No.2, present in person,

has stated that she was married, as per Hindu Customs Rites, on

27.01.2012 with Praveen Kumar Sharma, petitioner No.1 herein.

During subsistence of marriage, differences arose and

complainant/respondent No.2 was compelled to file impugned F.I.R.

Complainant/respondent No.2 – Smt. Ritu, present in

person, has stated that the matter has been amicably resolved between

the parties. She has further stated that a petition under Section 13-B of

the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage was filed by way of

mutual consent. Complainant/respondent No.2, present in person, has

stated she has received Rs.3,50,000/- towards permanent alimony and

the Family Court, Behrod, has already granted decree of divorce by way

of mutual consent. Lastly, she has prayed that she no longer intend to

pursue the case arising out of the impugned F.I.R..

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has

submitted that the compromise was presented before the trial Court.

The trial Court accepted the same, qua offence punishable under

Section 406 I.P.C. but rejected the same, qua offence punishable under

Section 498-A I.P.C. on the ground that the said offence is non-

compoundable.

The learned counsels appearing for the respective parties

have jointly prayed that since the matrimonial dispute has been

amicably resolved, the criminal cases pending between the parties as

well as impugned F.I.R. be quashed, so that the parties can pursue their

life and move ahead.

I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties

and have perused the contents of the instant petition.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-4298/2018]

It has been often held by the Courts that hour of the

compromise is the finest hour between the parties and the Court while

exercising its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash

the proceedings, even qua non-compoundable offences.

Furthermore, in the case of B.S. Joshi Vs. State of

Harayana, reported as [(2003) 4 S.C.C. 675], the Apex Court has

opined that although offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. is non-

compoundable, but in cases of matrimonial dispute to bring families at

peace, if the parties arrive at compromise, then proceedings, qua

offence under Section 498-A I.P.C. can be quashed by invoking its

inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Considering the fact that both the parties have resolved

their matrimonial dispute and the joint prayer made by the parties and

in view of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of B.S. Joshi

[supra], the present petition is allowed. The impugned F.I.R. No.532

of 2012 registered at Police Station Behrod District Alwar for offences

punishable under Sections 498-A and 406/34 of Indian Penal Code,

along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J
ashok

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation