Alkesh Barva @APPELLANT@Hash State of Rajasthan & Ors

Instant petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of impugned F.I.R. No.27/2014

dated 25.02.2014 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (South) for offences punishable under Section 498-A and 406 I.P.C.

Mr. Vinay Saxena, Advocate has caused appearance on behalf of the respondent No.2Â - Usha Rani.

Mr. Vinay Saxena, ld. counsel appearing for the respondent No.2, has submitted that since after obtaining decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the

Hindu Marriage Act vide Annexure-3, the respondent No.2 â€" Usha Rani has recently performed remarriage, therefore, it is difficult for her to cause

appearance in this Court. Counsel appearing for the respondent No.2 has further submitted that he has been authorized by the respondent No.2 to

facilitate quashing of present F.I.R., in view of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Mr. J.K. Moolchandani, ld. counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that on the basis of the impugned F.I.R. lodged, the Police submitted a

Final Report in negative form before the Court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, No.17, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur and upon filing of

protest petition, the said Court took cognizance of offences punishable under Section 498-A I.P.C. and under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have jointly submitted that due to amicable resolution of the dispute, the parties in order to give quietus to

the litigation preferred a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual consent.

The learned counsel appearing for the parties have further submitted that the compromise was presented before the trial Court and the said Court,

since offences are non-compoundable, had not accepted the compromise.

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 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 as [(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.27/2014 dated 25.02.2014 registered at

Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (South) for offences punishable under Section 498-A and 406 I.P.C., is quashed, along with all subsequent

proceedings.

Since the respondent No.2 is not present in this Court and the statement on her behalf has been made by Mr. Vinay Saxena, her Counsel, a liberty is

granted to her to pray for recall of the order, in case she has any grievance against the order passed by this Court.