SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Rajkumar Sharma vs State Of Raj And Anr on 16 April, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Criminal Misccellaneous (Petition) No. 1801/2018

Rajkumar Sharma S/o Shri Satish Kumar Sharma B/c Brahmin,
Aged About 39 Years, R/o Sarvodaya Vihar Colony, Police Station
Modak, Tehsil Ramganjmandi, District Kota, Raj.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp.
2. Meena Kumari D/o Shri Murari Lal Ji B/c Brahmin, Aged
About 35 Years, R/o House No.1063, Gali No.03, Chopda
Farm, Dadwana, Kota Junction, Police Station Bheemganj
Mandi, Kota.
—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vikas Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. N.S. Dhakar, PP for State
Mr. B.S. Kachhawa, for respondent
No.2

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Order

16/04/2018

Present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

seeking quashing of FIR No.136/2012, registered at Police Station

Mahila Thana, Kota City, for offences under Sections 498A and 406

IPC.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Meena

Kumari, complainant-respondent No.2, on 28.4.2009 was married

with petitioner Rajkumar Sharma as per Hindu rites and rituals.

Due to difference of opinion, Meena Kumar, respondent No.2-

aggrieved wife, was compelled to lodge the above said FIR. During

pendency of the proceedings better sense prevailed among the

parties and they amicably resolved the matrimonial dispute.

(2 of 2) [CRLMP-1801/2018]

Meena Kumari, complainant-respondent No.2, is present in

court.

Meena Kumari has stated that the petitioner husband has

agreed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- towards permanent

alimony, litigation expenses and cost.

Learned counsel for the parties have further submitted that a

Division Bench of this court has already granted divorce to the

parties on the basis of their consent. It is further submitted that

the trial court had accepted the compromise partially qua offence

under Section 406 IPC as the same was compoundable, but the

compromise was rejected under Section 498A Cr.P.C. being non-

compoundable.

Learned counsel for the parties have relied upon B.S. Joshi

Ors. v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675, to contend that

in matrimonial matters, to bring families at peace, this court while

invoking inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the

FIR and subsequent criminal proceedings.

Taking into account the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the dispute

has been resolved by the parties by way of compromise, the

petition is allowed and the impugned FIR alongwith all subsequent

proceedings qua the present petitioner is quashed.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J

Govind/

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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