Ashish Bhatia v. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj

S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 6991/2018 Ashish Bhatia S/o Sh. Ashok Kumar Bhatia, Aged About 28Years, R/o 91 Income Tax Colony-I Near Defence Public SchoolJagatpura Road Malviya Nagar Jaipur 302017 ----Petitioner Versus 1. State Of Rajasthan Through Pp, Raj. 2. Smt. Ankita Jerath W/o Shri Ashish Bhatia D/o Sri RishiRaj Jerath, Aged About 26 Years, R/o 13 Income TaxColony-I Near Defence Public School Jagatpura RoadMalviya Nagar Jaipur 302017Raj Jerath, Aged About 26 Years, R/o 13 Income TaxColony-I Near Defence Public School Jagatpura RoadMalviya Nagar Jaipur 302017 ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) For Respondent(s) : Mr. Giriraj P. Sharma : Ms. Meenakshi Pareek PP Mr. Nikhil Sharma for Mr. Mahendra Shandilya for complainant respondentno.2no.2 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA 12/11/2018 -/Order/- The present petition has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. praying that the proceedings arising out of FIR No.0170/2017 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City(East) for the offences under Sections 498A, 406, 323, 324, 312,315 IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, be quashed asmatrimonial dispute has been amicably resolved between theparties. Smt. Ankita Jerath, complainant respondent no.2 ispresent in the Court. She has been identified by her counsel Mr.Nikhil Sharma. Smt. Ankita Jerath, the complainant has stated that on28.1.2016 her marriage was performed with petitioner no.1, anddue to circumstances beyond control, she was compelled to lodgethe present FIR. Learned counsel for the parties have submitted thatnow better sense has prevailed upon the parties and matrimonialdispute has been amicably resolved. Learned counsel for theparties have jointly submitted that the investigating agency afterthorough investigation submitted charge-sheet against thepetitioner no.1 for the offences punishable under Sections 498Aand 406 IPC. It is submitted that the compromise was presentedbefore the trial court and the trial court accepted the same quaoffence under Section 406 IPC but rejected the said compromisequa offence under Section 498A IPC on the ground that the saidoffence is non-compoundable. The trial court on 11.10.2018 had passed the followingorder:- “vfHk;qDr vkf'k"k HkkfV;k e; vf/k- mi ifjoknhx.k vafdrktseu e; vf/k- mi- nksuks i{kks us mi- gksdj jkthukek izkFkZuki= vUrxZr /kkjk 498,] 406 vkbZihlh dk is'k dj i=koyhis'kh es fy;s tkus ds fuosnu ij vifBr is'kh dh xbZA nksuksi{kks dh vkSj ls izLrqr jkthukek izkFkZuki= vUrxZr /kkjk498,] vkbZihlh esa dkfcys jkthukek ugh gksus ls [kkjhtfd;k tkrk gSA o /kkjk 406 vkbZihlh 320¼2½ n.M izfØ;klfgrk dh lwph eqrkfcd 'keuh;r izØfr dk gksus lsU;k;ky; dh vuqefr ls /kkjk 406 vkbZihlh esa nksuks i{kks dhvkSj ls izLrqr jkthukek izFkd ls rLnhd fd;k x;kA vfHk;qDr vkf'k"k HkkfV;k dks vijk/k vUrxZr /kkjk 406vkbZihlh esa c:, jkthukek nks"keqDr ?kksf"kr fd;k tkrk gSA izdj.k /kkjk 498 vkbZihlh esa dk;Zokgh 'ks"k jgh gS i=koyh”iwoZ fuEu fnukad 15-11-2018 dks is'k gksA Smt. Ankita Jerath, the complainant present in thecourt has submitted that the parties have already filed a petitionunder Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution ofmarriage by way of mutual consent. She has stated that she hasalready received Rs.9 Lakhs by way of Demand Draft andremaining amount of Rs. 9 Lakhs shall be paid to her at the timeof grant of divorce. Learned counsel for the petitioner has furthersubmitted that today the case is fixed before the Family CourtNo.2, Jaipur on an application filed for exemption of six monthmandatory period. The learned counsel for the parties have jointly relied upon B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr., 2003Cri.L.J. 2028, to contend that this Court while exercisingjurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in furtherance of interest ofjustice in matrimonial dispute may bring families at peace byquashing FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner has furthersubmitted that today the case is fixed before the Family CourtNo.2, Jaipur on an application filed for exemption of six monthmandatory period. The learned counsel for the parties have jointly relied upon B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr., 2003Cri.L.J. 2028, to contend that this Court while exercisingjurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in furtherance of interest ofjustice in matrimonial dispute may bring families at peace byquashing FIR. On the prayer made by the learned counsel for the parties, in view of the judgment in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra),relied by the parties, the present petition is accepted andimpugned FIR along with all its subsequent proceedings isquashed. (KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA),J Mak/-