AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The petitioner has filed the present petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(herein referred to as ""Cr.P.C."") praying
for quashing of G.R Case No. 172 of 2012 arising out of Umiam P.S. Case No. 46 (8) 2012 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code
(I.P.C.) pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Nongpoh, Ri-Bhoi District.
The brief facts of the case as set out in the petition are that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 had been living in relation as husband and wife
since the year 2011 and the petitioner and respondent No. 4 have legally married on 9th April, 2017 according the Christian Marriage Act. The
marriage was solemnized by Mr. Willesh R. Marak, Pastor of Watchokgre Baptist Church, Rangsakona, Meghalaya and in marriage certificate
was issued on 9th April, 2017 (copy of marriage certificate is Annexure-1 to the petition).
It is stated that on 10th August , 2012, one Shri Beldol G. Momin who claimed himself to be the uncle of respondent No. 4 lodged a F.I.R. that
Mrs. Janshi G. Momin, respondent No. 4 was beaten by her husband due to which she remained unconscious for about seven hours and the
accused absconded after taking away all the households materials. On the basis of said complaint a case was registered as Umiam P.S. Case No.
46 (8) 2012 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code. It is also stated that the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant is totally false and
fabricated, with the malafide intention to harass and tarnish the image of the petitioner. The victim has no complaint against the petitioner and she
never advise Shri Beldol G. Momin to lodge F.I.R against the petitioner.
It is also stated by the petitioner that after registration of the F.I.R., a final report under Section 179 of Cr.P.C. was filed. The petitioner
obtained certified copy of the charge sheet on 4th July 2017. It is also stated that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 have settled their disputes
and a deed of compromise was executed on 6th March, 2017, copy of the same is Annexure-6 to the petition.
It is also stated by the petitioner that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 are living together happily as husband and wife and legally married on
9th April, 2017. It is also state that the statement of victim, respondent No. 4 was recorded by learned trial court on 8th May, 2017 (Annexure-
5).
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent No. 4, wife made a statement before learned trial court on 8th May, 2017 and
stated that the contents of the FIR are not true, she was sick at that time and due to sickness she had even collapsed. She told to her uncle that
what he was thinking was wrong but he did not trust her . the counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner and respondent No. 4 are
living happily and a female child was born in the month of July, 2016.
The respondent No. 4 Smti. Janshi G. Momin, who is present in person and identified by Shri. P.T. Sangma, advocate confirms that she is living
with the petitioner as husband and wife and they were legally married on 9th April, 2017 before the Pastor of Watchokgre Baptist Church,
Rangsakona, Meghalaya. She also confirms that she has amicably settled the dispute with the petitioner and a deed of compromise was executed
on 6th March, 2017. The respondent No. 4 also submits that she has been blessed with a female child who is about nine months old. She also
confirms that she made a statement before learned trial court on 8th May, 2017. The respondent No. 4 wife submits that she does not want to
pursue with the present FIR which was registered as Umiam P.S. Case No. 46 (8) 2012 under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code.
Mr. S. Sen. Gupta, learned Addl. P.P appearing on behalf of State submits that he has received a report from the Investigating Officer WPSI E.
Khardewsaw, Nongpoh P.S., Ri-Bhoi District wherein it is state that the Investigating Officer has inquired from mother of respondent No. 4 as
well as the Headman and the Secretary of the Local Dorbar of the village and they have confirmed that after filing of the FIR the petitioner and
respondent No. 4 had been living separately for about three years and thereafter they have started living together again and they are living
peacefully. It is also stated that the parties have been blessed with a daughter who is now aged nine months old and they want to continue with
their life. The learned Addl. P.P has filed the verification report, which taken on record.
Learned Addl. P.P appearing for the State submits that since it a matrimonial dispute and both the parties are living together and the respondent
No. 4 wife has settled the matter he has no objection if the FIR in question and proceedings there from are quashed.
The Hon''ble Supreme Court In the case of ''K. SRINIVAS RAO v D.A. DEPPA, (2013) 5 SCC 226'' has observed as under:
We, therefore, feel that though offence punishable under Section-498-A-IPC is not compoundable, in appropriate cases if the
parties are willing and if it appears to the criminal court that there exist elements of settlement, it should direct the parties to explore
the possibilities of settlement through mediation. This is, obviously, not to dilute the rigour, efficacy and purport of Section-498-A
IPC, but to locate cases where the matrimonial dispute can be nipped in bud in an equitable manner. The Judges, with their expertise,
must ensure that this exercise does not lead to the erring spouse using mediation process to get out of clutches of the law. During
mediation, the parties can either decide to part company on mutually agreed terms or they may decide to patch up and stay together.
In either case for the settlement to come through, the complaint will have to be quashed. In that event, they can approach the High
Court and get the complaint quashed. If, however, they choose not to settle, they can proceed with the complaint. In this exercise,
there is no loss to anyone. If there is settlement, the parties will be saved from the trials and tribulations of a criminal case and that will
reduce the burden on the courts which will be in the larger interest. Obviously, the High Court will quash the complaint only if after
considering all circumstances if finds the settlement to be equitable and genuine. Such a course, in our opinion, will be beneficial to
those who genuinely want to accord a quietus to their matrimonial disputes.
In view of the facts that the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature and both the parties have amicably resolved their differences on
their own free will, volition and without any coercion and no useful purpose will be served in continuation of the proceeding, rather the same would
create further acrimony between them, it would be in the interest of justice to quash the aforementioned F.I.R. and the proceeding pursuant
thereto. There is not legal impediment in quashing the F.I.R. in question.
In view of the above, the F.I.R. dated 28.04.2014 registered as G.R Case No. 172 of 2012 arising out of Umiam P.S. Case No. 46 (8) 2012
under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) and Criminal Proceeding pursuant thereto are hereby quashed.
Both the petitioners have signed on this order in acknowledgment of their statements made before the Court.
Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of.
CRL. MC. No. 12 of 2017
The application is dismissed being infructous.