IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.38828 of 2010 Janardan Thakur son of late Ram Piyari Thakur R/o village Kawal Pokhar, P.S. Itadhi DistrictBuxar…… Petitioner Versus 1 .State Of Bihar 2. Manju Devi W/o Janardan Thakur, R/o Kawas Pokha, P.S. Itadhi, District Buxar, at present resident of village Lakhan Dihara, P.S. Dumraon, District Buxar …Opposite parties. ------------- For the petitioner : Mr. Arun Kr. Sukla, Advocate. For the O.P. No.2: Mr. Anil Kr. Singh No.2, Advocate For the State : Mr. Shailendra Kumar, A.P.P. ------------- 4 06.09.2011 It happens to be plight of a married woman who had again on being issueless been forced to knock the doors of law where-under proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. was filed for maintenance as well as a criminal case for torture having been meted out to her while staying at her Sasural. Subsequently, the good feeling restored amongst the parties and in token thereof compromise petition was filed before the Principal Judge, Family Court in a case under section 125 Cr.P.C. as is evident from Annexure-3 and the aforesaid proceeding terminated in terms thereof. At the other hand, the complainant proceeded with her complaint petition no. 117(C) of 2008 and produced witnesses during course of enquiry under section 202 Cr.P.C. and vide order dated 18.10.2008 Mr. A.K. Lal, learned Sub-divisional Judicial Magistrate, Buxar, found a prima facie case to be punishable under sections 498 A and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. This order of summoning the petitioner happens to be the cause of filing the instant petition under section 482 Cr.P.C. 2 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for O.P. no.2 along with learned A.P.P. for the State. Section 498 A is a special provision enacted for protection of one of the member of the spouse who is being harassed by her counter part. Both parties have agreed and the matter has been compromised. Therefore, further allowing continuance of the litigation will be nothing more than abuse of the process of the Court. On this score reference may have 2005 (3) SCC 299 as well as 2005(3) SCC 302. Thus the order impugned dated 18.10.2008 passed by Shri A.K. Lal, S.D.J.M, Buxar in complaint case No. 117 ( C ) of 2008 is quashed. Consequent thereupon instant Criminal Miscellaneous petition is allowed. At this juncture, learned counsel for the O.P. no.2/complainant submitted that the petitioner husband is not paying the admitted maintenance amount regularly in terms of compromise, which has been denied by the learned counsel for the petitioner. Be that as it may, there happens to be a specific provision available for the O.P. no.2/wife to get her grievances redressed, if such situations accrue in future. M.Rahman (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J)