HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No:7760 OF 2009 ORDER: On the basis of the report given by the respondent, a case in Crime No.117 of 2007 was registered by the Women Police station, Begampet, Hyderabad, against the petitioner for the offence punishable under section 498-A IPC. Questioning the said proceedings, the petitioner filed the present petition. After completion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed and the same was numbered as C.C.No.143 of 2008 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. Sri G. Vasantha Rayudu, learned Counsel for the petitioner, states that the matter was compromised between the parties and both of them filed a compromise memo before the Family Court seeking dissolution of marriage. Accordingly, the Family Court by its order dated 24.3.2008 in O.P.No.797 o 2007 dissolved the marriage and the text of the said order reads as follows: “Petition filed under Section 13(1)(ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage solemnized between the petitioner and respondent on 14.4.1993 at Jaggayyapet, Krishna District on the ground of continuous mental cruelty and physical harassment under Section 13(1)(a) of the Hindu Marriage Act and granting permanent custody of the children to the petitioner and return the articles and gold and grant Rs.6,000/- p.m., towards interim maintenance. This petition coming on this day before me for hearing in the presence of both the parties and this Court doth order and decree as follows: Petition filed on : 17.7.2007 Petition numbered on: 24.8.2007 Cause of action arose on: 14.4.1993 1. That the petition filed by the petitioner, be and the same is hereby allowed in terms of compromise. 2. The marriage that was solemnized on 14.4.1993 at Jaggayyapet, Krishna District, A.P. according to Hindu religious rites and caste customs is hereby dissolved and a decree of divorce by consent is granted in favour of the petitioner and respondent with effect from the date of compromise decree. 3. By virtue of compromise decree, the petitioner shall continue custody of her two sons. Furnish the copy of this order to both parties by 4.4.2008.” In the light of the said dissolution of marriage and as the wife agreed for withdrawal of the cases against the petitioner, the learned Counsel for the petitioner seeks to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.143 of 2008. From a perusal of the decree of divorce, it appears that the said settlement is correct but in a case of this nature, it is always desirable that the parties should be present. The respondent-wife is absent. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that despite his best efforts to get the notice served on the respondent-wife, the said notices could not be served. In those circumstances, this Court is of the view that the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad can take up the matter i.e., C.C.No.143 of 2008 and decide the same at the earliest preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order. If the respondent-wife comes forward and states that she is not willing to proceed against the petitioner-accused, the Court below may record the same and get the offence compounded for the reason that the offence punishable under Section 498-A IPC is compoundable. With the above direction, the Criminal Petition is disposed of. ______________________________ Justice Gopala Krishna Tamada Dated: 29.12.2010 Nn HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No:7760 OF 2009 29.12.2010