1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. CR.MISC.PETITION NO.1956/2010 Sandeep Ednani & Anr. Vs. State Date of order : 25/10/2010. HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Shri J.P. Gupta for the petitioners. Shri Piyush Kumar, P.P. for the State. Shri D.K. Garg for the complainant. ****** This petition has been filed by the accused-petitioners who are son and mother, against the order of the Court of Sessions dated 6.9.2010, by which the said Court has refused to compound the offence against them u/s. 498A and 406 IPC on the premise that those offences were not compoundable in view of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. A criminal case was registered against the accused- petitioners at the instance of complainant. It is stated by learned counsel for the petitioner that eventually the matter was compromised between the parties and they have filed an application before the family court u/s.13B of the Hindu Marriage Act for mutual divorce and that accused-husband has agreed to give permanent alimony to the respondent-wife in the sum of Rs.8 lacs to put an end to all on going litigations. Learned counsel cited the judgement of Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr.-2003 (2) Crimes 284 (SC) in support of his arguments. 2 Shri D.K. Garg, learned counsel appearing for the complainant-wife does not dispute the factual contents of the aforesaid submissions. The Supreme Court in the cited case was considering a case where in similar circumstances the trial court as also the High Court refused to compound the offence u/s.498A and 406 of IPC asserting that those offences were not compoundable u/s. 320 of Cr.P.C. It was held that the High Court can quash the offence non-compoundable u/s.482 Cr.P.C. irrespective of the limitation u/s.320 of Cr.P.C. Having regard to the nature of the controversy and keeping in view the fact that the matter has been finally compromised between the parties and considering the law laid down by the Apex Court, the present petition deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The impugned order dated 6.9.09 is quashed and set aside and the proceedings against the petitioners pursuant to FIR No.143 for offence u/s.498A/406 of IPC lodged with Mahila Police Station, Ajmer are quashed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ), J. RS/-