HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 5825/2018

1. Ravi Sharma S/o Shri Ramprasad B/c Brahmin, R/o 222,
Sriramnagar Extension, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara, Jaipur
(Raj.)
2. Smt. Ashok Devi W/o Shri Ramprasad B/c Brahmin, R/o
222, Sriramnagar Extension, Kalwar Road, Jhotwara,
Jaipur (Raj.)
—-Petitioners
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
2. Seema Sharma W/o Ravi Sharma D/o Late Shri Manohar
Lal Sharma B/c Brahman, R/o Vishawkarma Body Repair,
B/h New Bus Stand, Dcm Road, Kota (Raj.)
—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. S.K. Singodiya
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya PP
Mr. Rohit Saini

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

-/Order/-

27/11/2018

The present petition has been filed under Section 482

Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of FIR No.137/2016 registered at Police

Station Mahila Thana, Kota for the offences under Sections 498A

and 406 IPC.

In the present case, quashing of FIR has been sought

on the basis of compromise.

Seema Sharma, respondent no.2 is present in the

court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr. Rohit Saini. Mr.
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-5825/2018]

Ravi Sharma petitioner no.1 is also present in the court and he

has been identified by his counsel Mr. S.K. Singodiya.

Seema Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that on

25.5.2013 she was married with petitioner no.1 as per Hindu

customs and rites. It is submitted that due to difference of

opinion, she was compelled to lodge the impugned FIR.

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.

Seema Sharma, respondent no.2 has stated that the

petitioner no.1 Ravi Sharma has agreed to pay Rs.2,50,000/-

towards Stridhan, expenses on marriage, permanent alimony and

cost of litigation etc.

Learned counsel for the parties have drawn attention of

this Court to the compromise Annexure-1 presented before the

trial court. The trial court vide order dated 7.8.2018 accepted the

said compromise for the offences under Sections 406 IPC and

acquitted petitioner qua said offence as the same is

compoundable, however, the trial court rejected the said

compromise qua offence under Section 498A IPC on the ground

that the said offence is non-compoundable.

Petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2 have jointly

submitted that they shall remain bound by compromise Annexure-

1 affected between the parties.

Seema Sharma, respondent no.2 has submitted that

she has received in all Rs.2,50,000/- paid by petitioner. She has

submitted that the divorce petition under Section 13B of Hindu

Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual consent
(3 of 3) [CRLMP-5825/2018]

is pending in the Family Court, Kota. It is submitted that the

divorce petition under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act is

coming for final motion on 2.2.2019.

Seema Sharma, complainant/respondent no.2 has

prayed that the impugned FIR be quashed as she no longer

intends to pursue the same.

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)