IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.6119 of 2008 MANMOHAN PRASAD & ORS Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 05. 14.05.2010 The present application has been filed for quashing the order dated 01.02.2007 passed in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2007, whereby the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran has transferred the complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. for instituting the F.I.R. and submitting final form after investigation. Consequently Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 136 of 2007 under Sections 182, 211 and 385 I.P.C. was registered against the petitioners. Hence petitioners have also prayed for quashing of Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No. 136 of 2007. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the aforesaid directions was given even prior to the completion of the investigation of Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No. 23 of 2007 filed by the wife petitioner No. 2. It is relevant to state here that petitioner No.2 was married to the son of O.P. No. 2 Mukteshwar Prasad. Subsequently the conjugal life went sour and petitioner No. 2 lodged Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No. 23 of 2007 under Section 498A, 406/34 of the I.P.C. and Section ¾ of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently the father of the husband lodged the complaint case being Complaint Case No. 277 of 2007 during 2 pendency of the investigation of 498A I.P.C. matter. Subsequently vide order dated 01.02.2007 learned C.J.M. Saran transferred the complaint under Section 156(3) of the Cr.P.C. which resulted into registration of Chapra Muffasil P.S. Case No. 136 of 2007 under Sections 182, 211, 385 of the I.P.C which is Annexure-2 to the present application. That the parties subsequently got mutual consent decree of divorce vide HMA No. 213 of 2007. A copy of the counter affidavit on behalf of O.P. No. 2 has been produced by the counsel for the petitioners. Let it be kept on record. In Para 6 and 7 of the counter affidavit, O.P. No. 2 has clearly stated that parties have no objection in quashing of Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No. 136 of 2007 and similar undertaking has been given by the petitioners’ side with regard to not prosecuting the Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No. 23 of 2007. Para 6 and 7 of the counter affidavit reads as follows. “That it is to be stated that the petitioner No. 2(Anita Kumari Srivastava) had also filed a criminal case vide Chhapra Muffasil FIR No. 23/07 under Section 498-A/406/34 IPC and ¾ of D.P. Act against the family members of opposite party no. 2 and as per the settlement arrived between the petitioner no. 2 and the son of the opposite party 2 Sh. Atul Kumar Sinha, the petitioner no. 2 has given 3 her no objection for the quashing of the case bearing No. 23/07 under Section 498-A/406/34 IPC and ¾ of D.P. Act. In pursuance to the undertaking given on 30.04.2010, an affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners that final payment of the balance amount has been made in pursuance to the consent divorce decree. The Wife Amita Kumari Shrivastave is present through the Advocate of O.P. No. 2. She admits that the marriage has been dissolved by the consent decree. The part payment was made and for the rest part, a draft of Rs. 5,55,000/- has been handed over to her which she has deposited in her account for encashment and apart from that she has no other claim against the husband. A supplementary affidavit has been filed on behalf of the petitioners to the effect that rest part of the permanent alimony to the tune of Rs. 5,55,000/- has been made to the wife. The wife no longer interested in pursuing 498A I.P.C. matter. She is only apprehensive about the encashment of the draft of Rs. 5,55,000/-. It is expected that the son of O.P. No. 2 will see that there should be no impediment for encashment of the draft. In view of the aforesaid facts that parties have parted way by way of mutual consent and the matter has been settled between the parties and in view of the statement made 4 by the wife herself before this Court and the affidavits filed by the parties, let the F.I.R. of Chapra Mufassil P.S. Case No.136 of 2007 registered under Sections 182, 211, 385 be quashed. No order for quashing of order dated 01.02.2007 passed in Complaint Case No. 277 of 2007 is being made since the order has already taken effect by way of registration of the F.I.R. Shageer (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)