SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Vikas Nirmal Son Of Shri Bhagirath … vs State Of Rajasthan on 26 November, 2018

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 7304/2018

Vikas Nirmal Son Of Shri Bhagirath Nirmal, Aged About 33 Years,
Resident Of Guru Nanakpura, Thana Narnaul, District Mahendragarh
(Haryana).

—-Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Pp

2. Smt. Seema Sharma Wife Of Vikas Nirmal Daughter Of Shri
Kisanlal Sharma, Resident Of Shikshak Colony, Behror, District
Alwar (Raj)

—-Respondents

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Neeraj Sharma
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Gaurav Kumar Gupta
For the State : Mr. Prakash Thakuriya, P.P.

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA

/ Order

26/11/2018
Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482

Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings in case arising out of

impugned F.I.R. No.91/2016 registered at Police Station Behrod District

Alwar for offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 I.P.C.

In the present case, quashing of impugned F.I.R., along with

all subsequent proceedings has been sought on the basis of compromise

affected between the parties.

Complainant/respondent No.2/aggrieved-wife – Smt. Seema

Sharma is present in person before this Court. She has been identified

by her Counsel – Mr. Gaurav Kumar Gupta.

Complainant/respondent No.2 – Smt. Seema Sharma,

present in person, has stated that her marriage was solemnized with

petitioner on 06.05.2013, as per Hindu Customs Rites. During
(2 of 3) [CRLMP-7304/2018]

subsistence of marriage, differences arose between them and she was

compelled to lodge impugned F.I.R. It is further stated that compromise

has been affected between the parties and the petitioner has agreed to

pay Rs.25,00,000/- towards ‘istridhan’, expenses of marriage and cost

of litigation. She has submitted that already Rs.12,50,000/- has been

paid to her by way of two cheques each amounting to Rs.6,25,000/-. It

is further submitted that the remaining amount of Rs.12,50,000/- shall

be paid to her by way of demand draft on the date when decree of

divorce shall be granted by the District Judge, Narnaul. She has stated

that already a petition for dissolution of marriage under Section 13-B of

the Hindu Marriage Act has been filed by way of mutual consent in the

Court of District Judge, Narnaul and the said petition is coming up for

final motion on 18.03.2019 before the said Court.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have further

relied upon the order dated 02.11.2018 passed by the Court of

Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Behrod, whereby compromise was

accepted, qua offence punishable under Section 406 I.P.C. but was

rejected, qua offence punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. on the

ground that the said offence is non-compoundable.

Complainant/respondent No.2 – Smt. Seema Sharma,

present in person, has stated that she is no longer interested to pursue

the impugned F.I.R.

The factum of compromise has also been vouchsafed by the

learned counsel appearing for the parties.

Counsel appearing for the respective parties have jointly

prayed that since the matrimonial dispute has been amicably resolved,

the criminal case pending between the parties arising out of F.I.R.

lodged by respondent No.2 be quashed, so that the parties can pursue

their life and move ahead.

(3 of 3) [CRLMP-7304/2018]

I have heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties

and have perused the contents of the instant petition.

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.91/2016 registered at Police Station Behrod District Alwar for

offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 406 I.P.C., 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 © 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