Chattisgarh High Court
Deepak Dubasi vs Smt. Neha Sood on 21 September, 2022
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 1477 of 2022
1. Deepak Dubasi S/o D. Prabhakar Rao Aged About 30 Years
R/o Plot No. 14, Near Deep Apartment, Pragati Nagar, Risali,
Nevai, District - Durg (C.G.), Presently Residing At Plot No. 72-
P, Dundmudi Enclave, Pet Bashirabad, K.V. Rangareddi
(Telangana) - 500067
2. Smt. Aruna Dubasi W/o D. Prabhakar Rao Aged About 61
Years R/o Plot No. 14, Near Deep Apartment, Pragati Nagar,
Risali, Nevai, District - Durg (C.G.)
3. D. Prabhakar Rao S/o Balakrishna Dora Aged About 68 Years
(Also Known As Prabhakar Rao Dubasi), R/o Plot No. 14, Near
Deep Apartment, Pragati Nagar, Risali, Nevai, District - Durg
(C.G.)
4. Smt. Dipti Rao W/o Laxmikant Varanasi Aged About 36 Years
R/o Flat No. 408, Block - A, Kesaswani Plaza, Ramchandra
Puram, Hyderabad, Hyderabad City,(Telangana)
---- Petitioners / Accused
Versus
1. Smt. Neha Sood W/o Deepak Dubasi Aged About 30 Years R/o
Vijay Bhavan, Sarju Bagicha, Near Airtel Exchange, Bilaspur
(C.G.) ---- (Complainant)
2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Station House Officer, P.S. -
Mahila Thana, Durg, District - Durg (C.G.)
---- Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For petitioners : Mr. APS Bhatia, Adv. For respondent No. 1 : Mr. J.A. Lohani, Adv. For respondent No. 2 : Mr. Vimlesh Bajpai, Govt. Adv.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hon'ble Shri Justice N.K. Chandravanshi Order on Board 21-9-2022
1. With the consent of the parties, the matter is heard finally.
2. The petitioners haves filed present petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (in brevity 'Cr.P.C.') praying for quashing of FIR No. 21/2018 registered at P.S. Mahila Thana, Distt. Durg (CG) for offence punishable under Section 498- A, 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in brevity 'IPC') and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 against the petitioners on the ground that matter has been settled between the parties.
3. Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that marriage of petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 1 was solemnized on 11-7-2016 .
2After few days of marriage, the petitioners started committing mental and physical harassment of the respondent No. 1, they ousted her from house on 5-8-2018. Therefore, she lodged FIR for the offence under Section 498-A, 34 of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the petitioners. After investigation, charge sheet has been filed and the case is pending before the JMFC, Durg as Mis. Criminal Case No. 3540/2019.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that both the parties have settled their dispute amicably, therefore, the petitioners have filed present petition praying for quashing of the above FIR and the criminal case on the strength of settlement arrived at between the parties. They have also deposed regarding their settlement in their statement recorded before the Addl. Registrar (Judicial).
5. Learned counsel for the State submits that in view of compromise arrived at between the contesting parties, suitable orders may be passed.
6. Learned counsel for the respondent No. 1 supports the submission made by counsel for the petitioners.
7. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.
8. Pursuant to order dated 7-9-2022 of this Court, statement of the petitioners and complainant/respondent No. 1 have been recorded by the Addl. Registrar (Judicial), in which they have stated that the matter has been settled between them amicably. The respondent no. 1/victim has also deposed that due to settlement arrived at between them, she does not want any action in the FIR No. 21/2018 registered at PS Mahila Thana, Durg against the petitioner, the charge sheet and the Misc. Cr. Case No. 3540/2019 pending before the JMFC, Durg (The petitioners have wrong mentioned FIR No. 12/2018 in their statements in place of FIR No. 21/2018). She has also deposed that she has voluntarily made settlement and the same has been executed without fear or pressure.
39. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matters of Jitendra Raghuvanshi and ors. -v- Babita Raghuvanshi and anr. [(2013) 4 SCC 58], Gian Singh -V- State of Punjab [(2012) 10 SCC 303], State of M.P. -v- Laxmi Narayan and ors. [(2019) 5 SCC 688], and in K. Srinivas Rao -v- D.A. Deepa [(2013) 5 SCC 226] has dealt with the matter and has expressed the need of allowing the compromise between the parties even in non-compoundable offences in matrimonial matters, of course, subject to facts and circumstances of each case.
10. In the instant case, though offence under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act are non- compoundable offence, despite that, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence, and the fact that it is a matrimonial dispute and the parties have amicably settled the dispute between them, therefore, compromise can be effected with the leave of this Court and this Court is of the considered opinion that there is sufficient material before this Court to form an opinion to quash the FIR in question subsequent proceedings.
11. Consequently, FIR No. 21/2018 registered at PS Mahila Thana, Durg, the charge sheet based on the FIR and the Misc. Criminal Case No. 3540/2019, deserve to be and are hereby quashed.
12. In view of the above, present petition is allowed. No costs.
Sd/-
(NK Chandravanshi) Judge Pathak/-