Research › Search › Judgment

J&K High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 448 (JK)

Sourabh Beri v. State of J&K

2021-09-02

RAJNESH OSWAL

body2021
ORDER : 1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners under section 561-A Cr.P.C. (now 482 Cr.P.C.) for quashing the criminal challan titled State vs. Sourabh Beri and Others pending before the court of learned Sub Judge/Special Mobile Magistrate (13th F.N.) Jammu arising out of FIR bearing No. 56 of 2016 dated 21.11.2016 registered with Police Station, Women Cell, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu at the behest of respondent No. 3 for commission of offences under section 498-A/109 RPC. 2. The quashing of the challan has been sought on the ground that the petitioners and respondent No. 3 have amicably settled their marital dispute and pursuant to that, even the marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 3 has been dissolved by way of decree of divorce passed by the court of learned Additional District Judge (Matrimonial Cases), Jammu on 09.11.2018. 3. Despite notice, respondent No. 3 has not chosen to cause her appearance. 4. Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG submits that he has no objection in the event, parties have settled their dispute amicably. 5. Mr. Maneesh Rampal, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that once the martial relationship of husband and wife is seized to exist between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 3 by way of decree of divorce by mutual consent, the continuance of the proceedings of the above mentioned challan is nothing but an abuse of process of law. 6. Heard and perused the record. 7. From the record it is evident that the marriage between the petitioner No. 1 and respondent No. 3 stands dissolved by way of decree of divorce dated 09.11.2018 and a perusal of said judgment reveals that the petitioner No. 1 therein and respondent No. 3 herein has specifically stated that she would not pursue the challan for commission of offence under section 498-A/109 RPC against the petitioner No. 1 as well as his mother and rather, she will co-operate with the petitioner No. 1 for quashing of the same. A perusal of judgment further reveals that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and continuance of proceedings of the above mentioned challan shall be an exercise in futility. 8. A perusal of judgment further reveals that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and continuance of proceedings of the above mentioned challan shall be an exercise in futility. 8. Law is well settled that if the parties have settled their dispute amicably, then the criminal proceedings whether arising out of private complaint or out of FIR for commission of offences under sections 498-A RPC can be quashed notwithstanding the fact that the section 498-A RPC is non-compoundable. Reliance is placed upon a judgment of the Apex Court in case, titled, Jatinder Raghuvanshi and Others vs. Babita Raghuvanshi and Another, 2013 (4) SCC 58 , in which it has been held that even if the offences are non compoundable, if they are relate to matrimonial disputes and the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and without any pressure, then section 320 of the Code would not be a bar to the exercising of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the subsequent criminal proceedings. 9. In view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the petitioners and respondent No. 3, criminal proceedings in challan titled State vs. Sourabh Beri and Others pending before the court of learned Sub Judge/Special Mobile Magistrate (13th F.N.) Jammu arising out of FIR bearing No. 56 of 2016 dated 21.11.2016 registered with Police Station, Women Cell, Gandhi Nagar, Jammu at the behest of respondent No. 3 for commission of offences under section 498-A/109 RPC are quashed. 10. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of along with connected application.