SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shailesh Sharma S/O Shri Sitaram … vs State Of Rajasthan on 12 December, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7358/2018

Shailesh Sharma S/o Shri Sitaram Sharma B/c Brahmin, R/o Plot
Number 4E, Binajari Marg, Bainad Road, Dadi Ka Phatak,
Jhotwara, Jaipur West, Jaipur, Raj.
—-Petitioner
Versus
1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp.
2. Smt. Shweta Sharma D/o Shri Mahendra Kumar Sharma,
W/o Shri Shailesh Sharma, R/o Village Baniyana, Tehsil
Dausa, Police Station Lawan, District Dausa, Raj., At
Present R/o Plot Number 4E, Binajari Marg, Bainad Road,
Dadi Ka Phatak, Jhotwara, Jaipur West, Jaipur, Raj.
—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Amit Singh Shekhawat
For Respondent(s) : Mr. V.S. Godara, PP for State
Mr. Puneet Saini, for respondent No.2

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

Order

12/12/2018

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

seeking quashing of case FIR No.106/2016, registered at Police

Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur (West) for offences under Sections

498-A, 406 IPC. In the present case quashing of FIR has been

sought on the basis of compromise arrived between the parties.

Smt. Shweta Sharma, complainant-respondent No.2, is

present in court. She has been identified by her counsel Shri

Puneet Saini.

Smt. Shweta Sharma, complainant, has stated that out of

wedlock a daughter aged two and a half years was born. Smt.
(2 of 2) [CRLMP-7358/2018]

Shweta Sharma carrying a child in her lap has stated that now due

to intervention of family members, matrimonial dispute has been

amicably resolved and now, she is residing happily in her

matrimonial home. Smt. Shweta Sharma has stated that she no

longer intend to pursue the present FIR.

Learned counsel for the parties have vouchsafed the factum

of compromise and have drawn attention of this court to the order

dated 20.10.2018 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.2, Jaipur

District whereby the Magistrate has attested the compromise for

offence under Section 406 IPC being compoundable offence,

however, rejected the same for offence under Section 498-A IPC

on the ground that the said offence is non-compoundable.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has 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 even for non-

compoundable offences.

Taking into account the submissions made by the learned

counsel for the parties and considering the fact that the

matrimonial dispute has been resolved by the parties by way of

compromise, present petition is allowed and the impugned FIR

alongwith all subsequent proceedings is quashed.

(KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J

Govind/

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