HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP. No. S74i2lm8 PETITIONER§ 1. Omprakash, Sfo Ashok, aged about 22 ' years, 2. Ashok, Slo Faguva, aged about 42 years 3. Kaiindri Baé, Wit: Ashak, aged about 38 4, Lokesh Kuman Slo Ashok Kumar aged abcut 18 years years 5. Chuniya Bai, D/o Ashok aged about 19 years 6. Surekha Bai, Wio Omprakash, aged - aboutZOyearsv A” R/o Viiiage-Khudmuda, P.S. Patan, District Durg (C.G.). VERSEUS RESPONDENT ‘ The State of Chhattisgarh, Through Mahiia Poiice Station Durg, District Durg (C.G.). (PETITION UNER SECTION 482 OF Cr.P.C.) (SB: Hon’ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J) Present: Shri Goutam Khetrapai, Advocate for appiicantslpetitioners No‘ 1 to 5. Shri Goutam Khetrapai, Advocate for appiioant No, 6lcompiainant. Shri Sameer Behar, PL. for the State/respondent. ORAL ORDER (Passed on 30IQ1!2009)ee~w K The applicants have fiied this petition for quashment of the proceedings of Criminai Case No. Q84I2008 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate First Class Durg District Durg by which the appiication for permission to compound the offence punishabie under Section 498—A R/W Section 34 of the indian Penai Code was rejected on the ground that Sections 320 (1} and 320(2) of the Cr.P.C. does not stipulate compounding of the offence mentioned above. Learned counsei for the appiicants piecing reiiance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of BE. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another‘ submits that though in accordance with the provisions of Section 320 ' i of the Code of Criminai Procedure the offence under Section 498-A i.P.C..are i 1 (2003) 4 SCC 675 @? .w. 2w i non-compoundabie in nature yet the crimina! proceedings initiated for the offence punishable under any of these sections can be quashed’by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. The relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted beow:- l “1 4. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the !ndian Penal Code was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his retatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relative to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper technical View would be counterproductive 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 XX—A of the lndian Penal Code. 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 the Code.” Thus according to the above cited decision of the Apex Court it is the duty of the Court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes and the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not limit or i I: affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 4. in the instant case appiicants No. 1 to 5 are accusedfhusband and relatives of the husband and applicant No. 6 wife isf‘do’gplainant. According to the petition they have entered into compromise and they have started residing together and they have settled their disputes without any pressure and fear. 5. in view of the aforementioned pronouncement of the Apex Court and the fact appiicants No. 1 to 5 ~Omprakash, Ashok, Kaiindri Bai, Lokesh Kumar, Chuniya Bat and applicant/complainant No. 6 -Surekha Bai have settled their disputes ff, micably without pressure or fear, it wouid be in the‘interest of justice to aiiow the petition and accusediappiicants No. 1 to 5- Omprakash, A§hok, Kalindii Bai, Lokesh Kumar, Chuniya Bai be acquitted for the offence punishabie under Section 498-A RIW Seciion 34'of the lndian Penal Code. ‘Consequently, the petition is ailowed and accusediapplicants No. 1 to 5- Omprakash, Ashok, Kaiindri Bai, Lokesh Kumar, Chuniya Bai be acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 498-A RNV Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. a