High CourtsSingle Bench(2018) 08 RAJ CK 0195

Nand Kishore @APPELLANT@Hash Raghunath

Rajasthan High Court · Decided on 6 August 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
Kanwaljit Singh Ahluwalia, J
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 4591 of 2018

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

33 paragraphs · 647 words

Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings arising out of impugned F.I.R. No.327/2015 dated

06.11.2015 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Tonk for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 354, 452 and 120-B I.P.C. and under

Section 4 of the Prohibition of Dowry Act.

In the present case, quashing of impugned F.I.R. has been sought on the basis of compromise.

Briefly stated, the complainant/respondent No.2 — Smt. Deepika Sharma on 04.12.2011 was married with Nand Kishore, petitioner No.1 herein, as

per Hindu Customs & Rites, and son named Chirag was born to the parties on 14.03.2013. During subsistence of marriage, differences arose and the

complainant/respondent No.2 was compelled to lodge above said F.I.R. During pendency of the proceedings, better sense has prevailed and the

parties have amicably resolved the dispute.

Complainant/respondent No.2 — Smt. Deepika Sharma, is present in person before this Court. She has been identified by Ms. Neha Dixit, advocate.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have vouchsafed the factum of compromise.

Complainant/respondent No.2 — Smt. Deepika Sharma, present in person, has submitted that the petitioner No.1 — Nandkishore has already

prepared F.D.R. amounting to Rs.2,00,000/-in the name of Chirag, son of the petitioner. Furthermore, a plot has been transferred in the name of

complainant/respondent No.2 — Smt. Deepika Sharma. It is stated that the compromise was presented before the trial Court. The trial Court

accepted the same, qua offence under Section 323 I.P.C., but the same was rejected, qua offences under Sections 498-A, 452 and 354 I.P.C. and

under Section 4 of the Prohibition of Dowry Act, as such offences are non-compoundable.

The order dated 05.02.2018 passed by the trial Court reads as under :-

“05-02-18 ifjoknh;k Jherh nhfidk 'kekZ mi0A vfHk;qDr uUnfd’kksj ,oa jkeckcw mQZ jkepUn mi0A nksuksa i{kks us la;qDr :i ls /kkjk 498 , 323]

452] 354] vkbZihlh o /kkjk 4 izfr’ks""k vf/kfu;e esa jkthukek fd;kA nksuksa i{kksa dk jkthukek e fy[kh bckjr ikb xbZA nksuksa i{kksa

us jkthukek esa fy[kh bckjr dks lgh o lR; gksuk Lohdkj fd;kA i{kdkjku ds e; jkthukek Lora= lgefr ls gksus ds laca/k ea U;k;ky; vk’oLr gSA /kkjk

498 , 323] 452] 354] vkbZihlh o /kkjk 4 ngst izfr’ks""k vf/kfu;eesa fof/kuqlkj jkthukek Lohdkj ;ksX; ugh gksus ls /kkjk 323 Hkk-nl- dh gn rd jkthukek

rLnhd fd;k tkrk gSA 'kkfey i=koyh jgA.”

The learned counsels appearing for the respective parties have jointly prayed that since the matrimonial dispute has been amicably resolved, the

criminal cases pending between the parties as well as impugned F.I.R. be quashed, so that the parties can pursue their life and move ahead.

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 in [(2003) 4 S.C.C. 675], the Apex Court has opined that although offence

under Section 498-A I.P.C. is noncompoundable, 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.327/2015 dated 06.11.2015 registered at

Police Station Mahila Thana, Tonk for offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 406, 354, 452 and 120-B I.P.C. and under Section 4 of the

Prohibition of Dowry Act, along with all subsequent proceedings is quashed.