Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 136 (MP)

Ankush Golecha v. State of M. P.

2009-01-28

INDRANI DATTA

body2009
ORDER 1. Petitioners have filed this petition under section 482 of CrPC for quashing the entire proceedings with respect to Crime No. 59 of 2006 registered at Thana Padav, District Gwalior for offence punishable under section 498-A and 323/34 of IPC and section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act initiated against the petitioners and pending before JMFC, Gwalior. 2. As per petitioners, the facts stated in brief are that petitioner No. I Ankush Golecha was married with respondent No.2 Smt. Shweta GoJccha according to Hindu religion. Their marriage did not last longer and a decree of mutual divorce under section 13 (B) of Hindu Marriage Act was granted by Principal Judge of Family Court in Case No. 86-A of 2007 on the terms of giving Rs. 32 lacs for maintenance of Smt. Shweta Golecha and her son Viraj Golecha @ Veer Jain. Criminal trial No. 4995 of 2007 was also pending in the Court of JMFC, Gwalior against petitioners. Both the parties thereafter filed compromise applications before learned trial Court under section 320 of CrPC and learned trial Court on 13.1.2009 rejected both the applications in respect of section 498A and section 4 and 6 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the ground that section 498A of IPC is non-compoundable offence. Therefore, this petition to invoke inherent powers for quashing the proceedings of Cr case No. 4995 of 2007 in connection with Crime No. 59 of 2006. 3. Perused the certified copies of order sheets and impugned order dated 13.1.2009 passed in Criminal Case No. 4995 of 2007 pending in the Court of JMFC, Gwalior. 4. In case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and another [2003 (I) MPWN 145 = AIR 2003 SC 259] Hon. apex Court has held that in matrimonial disputes when both the parties approached before the High Court and filed application for quashing the FIR, the High Court can quash the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and section 320 of CrPC does not limit or affect inherent powers of High Court granted under section 482 of CrPC. 5. 5. In Satyendra Dharmpal and others v. State of U.P., 2008 CrLJ (NOC) 919 in that case of matrimonial dispute application was filed u/s 482 of CrPC for quashing criminal proceedings against husband under section 323, 504, 506 and 498 of IPC and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition act, the parties arrived at compromise, there were no chances of conviction. Considering this, proceedings were quashed. 6. According to the contents of the petition filed under section 482 0 CrPC and other relevant documents on record, it is clear that the parties have resolved their dispute. They are personally present in the Court. Respondent No.2 Shweta Golecha does not want to proceed further against her husband petitioner No.1 Ankush Golecha and other petitioners with respect to the Criminal Case No. 4995 of 2007. 7. In the light of above observations and for the foregoing reasons, I allow the petition and quash the criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4995 of 2007 in connection with Crime No. 59 of 2006 pending in the Court of JMFC, Gwalior. A copy of this order be sent to the trial Court concerned for information.