Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 250 (MP)

Ramvati v. Sadhana

2016-03-22

SUBHASH KAKADE

body2016
ORDER 1. This petition under section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, hereinafter referred to as 'the Code' has been filed by the applicant for quashing of order dated 28.8.2015, passed in Criminal Appeal No.315/2013, by learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, whereby the application under section 320(2), CrPC filed by the parties has been rejected by holding that as the applicants have been convicted under section 498A of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 03 years and fine of Rs.500/- each vide judgment dated 5.9.2013 delivered in Criminal Case No.1715/2004, therefore, the permission to compound the aforesaid offence could not be granted. 2. The respondent No.1 had filed a complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhindwara registered as Criminal Complaint Case No.1715/2004. After recording of the evidence, learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhindwara has convicted the applicants under section 498A/34 of IPC vide judgment dated 5.9.2013 and sentenced to R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.500/- each. The applicants being aggrieved by the conviction and sentence filed an appeal under section 374 of CrPC before the learned Sessions Judge, Chhindwara which is pending adjudication. 3. During the pendency of the appeal parties have entered into compromise and filed an application before the lower appellate Court for compounding the offence punishable under section 498A of IPC. Learned lower appellate Court rejected the application by holding that as the applicants have been convicted under section 498A of IPC and sentenced to R.I. for 3 years and fine of Rs.500/- each vide judgment dated 5.9.2013 delivered in Criminal Case No.1715/2004, therefore, the permission to compound the aforesaid offence could not be granted. 4. True it is that the offence under section 498A of IPC is not made compoundable under section 320 of CrPC, hence the learned trial Court has not committed any error in dismissing the application of the compromise filed by the parties, but at this stage under the inherent powers enumerated under section 482 of the Code, the proceeding pending in the Court of learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, in Criminal Appeal No.315/2013 as well as order dated 28.8.2015 and all consequential proceedings in the light of factum of compromise could be quashed by this Court. My such approach is based on law laid down by the apex Court in the matter of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and others, reported in 2003 (I) MPWN 145 = AIR 2003 SC 1386 in which it was held as under : “14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing section 498A in the IPC 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 IPC. 15. 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 under section 482 of CrPC.” 5. In view of aforesaid dictum, this Court is very well under his authority to quash Criminal Appeal No.315/2013 as well as order dated 28.8.2015 and all the consequential proceedings thereof. 6. It is apparent that both the parties have entered into compromise voluntarily without any undue influence or coercion. The compromise appears to be bona fide and in the welfare of the parties. 7. In view of above peculiar facts and circumstances of the case in hand, this application stands allowed. The order dated 28.8.2015, passed in Criminal Appeal No.315/2013, by learned Fourth Additional Sessions Judge, Chhindwara as well as the judgment dated 5.9.2013 delivered in Criminal Case No.1715/2004, by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Chhindwara and all the other consequential proceedings thereof are hereby quashed, which amounts to acquittal of the applicants from the charges punishable under section 498A/34 of IPC. 8. Let the Courts below be intimated in this regard.