Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Manish And Ors vs State Of Raj Asthan Through Pp And Ors on 21 February, 2011
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR SB Criminal Misc. Petition No.348/2011 Manish & others Vs. State of Rajasthan & another Date of order 21.2.2011 HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE MEENA V. GOMBER Mr. Anurag Sharma, for accused-petitioners Mr. Laxman Meena, Public Prosecutor for State non petitioner no.1 This Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has been filed by the petitioners for quashment of the criminal proceedings for the offence punishable under S.498A IPC in Criminal Appeal No.108/2010 which is pending before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bharatpur, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the petitioner (husband) and non petitioner (wife).
Brief facts giving rise to this criminal misc. petition are that father of non petitioner no.2 (wife) had lodged a report at Mahila Police Station Bharatpur on which FIR no.125/2008 for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 406 IPC was registered and after investigation the charge sheet was filed against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. After completion of trial, Judicial Magistrate No.1, Bharatpur vide order dated 29.7.2010 convicted the petitioners for offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC and sentenced them to one year's rigorous imprisonment and fine on both the counts respectively.
The petitioners thereafter preferred a criminal appeal
- 2 -
challenging the judgment and order dated 29.7.2010 passed by the Judicial Magistrate in Criminal Case No.172/2008, which is pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bharatpur as Criminal Appeal No.108/2010.
During pendency of the aforesaid criminal appeal, the parties have resolved their disputes amicably out of court and on 6.1.2011 a joint application under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act was filed before the Sessions Judge for a decree of divorce by mutual consent. On the same day, an application along with a compromise arrived at between the husband and wife to live together, was filed seeking permission to compound the offences, before the Additional Sessions Judge, which was allowed in part, granting permission for composition of the offence under Section 406 IPC but in regard to the offence under Section 498A IPC the application was rejected on the ground that offence under Section 498A was not compoundable.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and taking into consideration all the facts and circumstances of the case keeping in view the decision rendered in B.S. Joshi & others v. State of Haryana & another, 2003 III AD (S.C.), where the Apex Court granted leave in a matter dealing with High Court's power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash FIR or criminal proceedings notwithstanding the offence being non compoundable. When both the parties wish to settle matrimonial dispute through a compromise arrived at between them, no fruitful purpose can be achieved by keeping some of the
- 3 -
proceedings on account of technical reasons. This appears to be a fit case for exercise of inherent jurisdiction of this court. Accordingly, the Criminal Misc. Petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 6.1.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge No.2, Bharatpur, in Criminal Appeal No.108/2010 is set aside, the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners under Section 498A IPC are hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the accused petitioners stand acquitted of the charge for the offence under Section 498A IPC.
(Dr. Meena V. Gomber) J.
db