Suresh Jhariya vs State of Madhya Pradesh

U.C. Maheshwari, J.—The applicants/petitioners have come to this Court u/s 482 of Cr.P.C. to extend them acquittal from the charges of offence punishable u/s 498-A of I.P.C. with the averments that in pendency of the impugned criminal case No. 9929/10, in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Jabalpur, the respondent No. 2, has entered into compromise with the applicants and the same was in the trial Court filed u/s 320 of Cr.P.C. On consideration vide order dated 5.11.2012 the same was allowed till the extent of the offence of Sections 294 and 506-B of I.P.C. as the same are made compoundable under the law and pursuant to that the applicants have been acquitted from such charges, but such compromise has been rejected by the trial Court till the extent of the offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C. stating that such Section is not made compoundable under the law. True it is that the offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C. is not made compoundable u/s 320 of Cr.P.C., hence the trial Court has not committed any error in dismissing the application of the compromise filed by the parties till the extent of offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C., but at this stage under the inherent powers enumerated u/s 482 of Cr.P.C., the offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C. along with it''s First Information Report in the light of the factum of compromise could be quashed by this Court. My such approach is based on a law laid down by the apex Court in the matter of B.S. Joshi and Others Vs. State of Haryana and Another, in which it was held as under:- 14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XXA containing Section 498A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper-technical view would be counter productive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XXA of Indian Penal Code.

In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers u/s 482 of the Code.

In view of the aforesaid dictum, after verification of the relevant facts from the parties present, this Court can quash the charge of Section 498-A of I.P.C. as well as the First Information Report lodged by the respondent No. 2.

It is apparent from the impugned order of the trial Court annexed with the petition that the respondent No. 2 has entered into compromise with the applicants voluntarily without any undue influence or coercion so till this extent, no further verification is required. On carrying out the verification regarding factum of compromise for the offence Section 498-A of I.P.C. from the parties, then the respondent No. 2/complainant submits that every dispute has been settled between applicant No. 1 husband and her and now, there is no any dispute in existence and as per mutual compromise they have filed the petition with the joint signature before the District Court for dissolution of their marriage. In such premises, the respondent No. 2 categorically stated that she does not want any proceedings against any of the applicants u/s 498-A of I.P.C. The applicant No. 1 and the other applicants No. 2 to 6 who are nearest relative and family members of applicant No. 1 have also stated that they did not have any objection in quashing the impugned trial pending against them for the offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C. In the light of the aforesaid verification, the compromise appears to be bonafide and in the welfare of the respondent No. 2 and applicant No. 1 along with other applicants. So, in view of such factum of compromise this petition is allowed and the entire proceedings of the above-mentioned criminal case No. 9929/10 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Jabalpur against the applicants for the offence of Section 498-A of I.P.C. is hereby quashed. Till this extent, the impugned'' First Information Report lodged by the respondent No. 2, is also quashed. Let the trial Court be intimated in this regard. Certified copy as per rules.