S-itSi' '^•SSiSA.^' ~s ffltI; Sk HIGH COUBrT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CR.MISC.PET.NO. 306/W08 PETITIONER8 SB : Hoiittle Mr. T.P. Shariaa, J. RESPONDENT8 1. 2. 3. Versus 1. Ajay Kiiinar CTioiihey, aged aboiit. 46 years, S/o. Late SIui VishauPrasad Choubey, r/o. F-4, Church Road, Civfl i/UiCS, UUTg, v-'U' Ms. Ranjana CTioubey, age-d aboiit 52 years, D/'o. Late SIui Visluiu Prasad Choubey, r/o. MIG 257, Padaiaaabhpur, Durg, CG Smt. >Jayshn>e Choiibey, agcd aboTit 34 years, W/o. Shri Ajay Kuinar Choubey (divorced) C/o. Shri Basant Kumar Sharaia, r/o. 11/49, Hudco, Bhilai, Distt. Duis, CG Aiadi Nagar, State of ChhattissarTi, Tlimigh StetinTi House Officer, P.S. MahilaThaaaDurg (CG) PETITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CR.P.C. .^.•.ri'^iRS&f^ Prescnt. : Shri R.S.Marhas, coiinsd for tlie pftitioners. Shri Rakesh Jha, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State. The petitioners are present in person. ORDER (Passcd on 31rt July, 2008) Thc appticante havc fiteri tTiis petition cT'iallengiTig tlie orrler dated 20.06.2008 passed by thc >hidicia1 Magistrate First Class, niii^ ITI Cr.Case No. 377/2008 by whicti t.he apnlication for compoundiTig tTie oflFence pnnisTiahle iindcr Section 498-A/34 of tlie IPCand Section 4 of ttieDowiy ProTiibition Act, was rejecteri on thc gronnd ttiat Scction 320 of the Cr.P.C. does not stipiilate conipoiiTiding of the offeTices TneTitioned above. 2. l^camed coiinscl for t1ie petitioners placing n'liance iipon tlie jiidgment of tTie Apex Conrt in thc matter of B.S^Ioahi eind Others 17s. V^KV0f Stcitv'of Bwyem.a. and mwther11 submits that though in acGordance with the provisioTis ofSection 320 offhe Codc ofCriminal Procediire thR offeTices iirxler ScctioTi 498-A, IPC and Section 4 oftlie Dowry Protiihition Act are non-coTnpoiindable in natiin" yet the criimnal pnx'Bedings imtiatcd for t.he offence piinisTiabte iinder any ofthese sections can he quasTier! hy exercising jurisdiction imder Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. tTie rclRVSTit portion ofthe. ssaid jiidgment. is extractcd below: a»aii?';r* '74. Thfre is no dnuhi ffiat the ohJRCt of intradiicing Chnptp.r XX-A cnntajning Sfc^ion 49f?-A in ttif> Tn/iian Pennl ("'ocfe inas tn prevenl tortiirc to a. inoman hy hf.r hi.tfshand or hy relatives of her hiAshand Section 498-A was addfd vriih a. vienv to piinishing a hs.ishand. and his rp.lfj.tivrs ivhn harass nr iortlire. the wifc to cocrr^. her or hfr rflatives fa Ratifsfy unlawfizl drmaniis of dmary. The hypsrtcrh.nirx]1 inev vmiild he counterprndiiative and. wmild aaf agairsst inlf're.st of vmm.en arul against the ohjp.fi far whiifi. this prnvisinn. was (aMcd. Thp.re is evsrylikeVhnnd thfit ncin-p.xcrrsse af inhfrenl poiver fo (fiash thfi proce.e.dings fo m.cet thf onrfs ofjijsticf ivoufd prevmt vmmsnfram settling earlicr. Thasl. i.s no( the nhjecst nf Cha.ptfr XX-A nfthe Iinf3.ian Penal Codc. 75. ?n. tif<>i^ cif ihe ahnve disfijfsffian, loc hnld fhaf. thf> Tfigh Ccnirt in e.xemsR ofilR inhf.TRnl pmsiers can (pinsh crimirtal procy.p.dings or FTR ar cnplaint nnd ffp.ation 3W of the Cnde dofs not lirrdt nr affe.ci ihf pmuetrs undctr Seedion 4S9, nfthe Code.' 3. TTnis, according to t1ie aliove cited clecision of thc Apex Coiirt it is the dllty of tTic Coiirt to encmirage gemiine scttleineTits of inatrinionial dispiitcs BTid the provisions of Section 320 of tlie Code of Criininal Procediire do not 1imit or affect the powers iinder SectioTi 482 ofthe Code of Criminal Proccdure. 9 ;1 (2003)4 SCC 675 y Iftta •;;Ifc,. ^j j "\^// .2,,s* 4. In tTic 'Tistantcasc, the marriage hclwcen thc respondent No.2 aTid the pe-titioncr No.1 has been dissolvcd by a Tnntiial dccree of divorce. However, now t1iey 'have fifed a joint apptication for permission to conipoiind ttif offcncp- catcgoriRaHy stating t.herein that. Vhc rlismitcs anr] grievances lietayeen tTieni Tiave heen setfleri witTioiit any ptf?ssiire and fear. 5. In view of ttie aforenientioned prOTioiiTiceTnfTit. of the Apex Coiirt and tlie fact tTiat the petitioncr No.1 and responde.nt No.2 have settted tTieir dispiites sroicably wittioiit pressiire or fear, it won1d bc in tlieiTiten-st of jiistice to a11ow the petition and qiiasTi crimina] proceediTigs heforR iJudicial Magistrate Firat. C1ass, Diirg. 5. Conseqiient.ly, thc pctitioTi is alloweri and ttie. criininal proceedings pending in tlie Coiirt ofihidicial Magistratc First dass, Oiirg in Cr. Case No. 377/2008 are Tierehy quashcd. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge ..1.-P* wy""