Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 345 (RAJ)

Aabid Hussain v. State

2020-02-07

SANDEEP MEHTA

body2020
JUDGMENT Sandeep Mehta, J. - The instant misc. petition has been filed seeking quashing of the proceedings of the Cr. Case No.142/2016 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur District arising out of FIR No.75/2016 registered at the Woman Police Station (East), Jodhpur Metropolitan for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 of the I.P.C. on the basis of the compromise. 2. The respondent No.2 is the first informant and the petitioner is her husband. 3. Both the learned counsel for the parties have submitted that the parties have decided to terminate their ties by mutual consent and thus, the proceedins going on in the trial court should be quashed. 4. They submit that the respondent filed an application before the court below for termination of the proceedings through a mutual compromise. The trial Court vide order dated 9.12.2019 has accepted the said application for the offence under Section 406 of the I.P.C. and has compounded the proceedings to that extent only to the extent of co-accused Husna Bano, who was also acquitted of the charge under Section 498A I.P.C. in absence of evidence. 5. So far as the petitioner is concerned, the trial Court kept the proceedings open and did not accept the compromise on the premise that the petitioner had absconded. However, in my opinion, a mutual compromise arrived at between the parties to a matrimonial dispute should nto be rejected only on the ground that the accused is unavailable to face the proceedings because the right to compromise is the prerogative of the complainant. 6. In this view of the matter and looking to the guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2012) 9 JT 426 (SC) , it is apparent that allowing the proceedings going on against the petitioner in the learned trial Court to be continued cannot be said to be expedient in the interest of justice. If the proceedings are allowed to continue, it may result into the compromise being unsettled. Though the petitioner was absconding during the trial, but looking to the compromise arrived at between the complainant and the petitioner, this Court feels that ends of justice would be served in quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court below. 7. Accordingly, the misc. petition is allowed and the proceedings of the Cr. Though the petitioner was absconding during the trial, but looking to the compromise arrived at between the complainant and the petitioner, this Court feels that ends of justice would be served in quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner in the court below. 7. Accordingly, the misc. petition is allowed and the proceedings of the Cr. Case No.142/2016 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur District arising out of FIR No.75/2016 registered at the Woman Police Station (East), Jodhpur Metropolitan for the offences under Sections 498A and 406 of the I.P.C. are hereby quashed. Stay petition is also disposed of.