Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
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/