Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 191 of 2010
Petitioner :- Smt. Rama Devi And Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Another
Petitioner Counsel :- Akash Mishra
Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Shri Kant Tripathi,J.
1. The applicant Smt. Rama Devi and five others have filed the
instant petition under section 482 CrPC for quashing the proceedings
of the Complaint Case No. 1357 of 2007, Aarti Devi vs. Ram Mohad
& others, under sections 498-A, 506 IPC and section 3/4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, police station Bharthana district Etawah,
pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate II, Etawah.
2. The applicant no. 6 Ramohad Singh and his wife, the opposite
party no. 2 Smt. Aarti Devi, have filed a joint affidavit to the effect
that they have settled their differences and disputes and have agreed
to live together. On the basis of the compromise, the case instituted
under section 125 CrPC by the opposite party no. 2 has already been
decided.
3. The Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise
in regard to non-compoundable offences in the case of B.S. Joshi
and others vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675 and
has held as follows:
“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes
necessary, section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It
is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of
each case whether to exercise or not such a power. Thus, the High Curt on
exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or
complaint and section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under
section 482 of the Code.”
4. The principles of law propounded in B. S. Joshi’s case (supra) has been applied with approval in
the case of Nikhil Merchant v. CBI and another (2008) 9 SCC 650.
5. In CBI Vs. Duncans Agro Industries Ltd.(1996) 5 SCC 591 the
Apex Court upheld the order of the High Court quashing the
criminal complaint after the civil action had been compromised
between the parties. No doubt, Duncans Agro case (supra) was in
regard to the offence under section 420 IPC, which was
compoundable but the principles of quashment of the criminal
proceeding on the basis of compromise was evolved.
6. In view of the fact that the husband and the wife have settled their
disputes and already living together amicably, it is unnecessary to
proceed with the criminal case pending before the concerned
Magistrate. The application under section 482 CrPC is accordingly
allowed and the proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case are
quashed.
Order Date :- 1.2.2010
RKSh