HIGHCOURTOFCHHATTISGARH. BILASPUR Criminal Misc. Petition No.301 of 2009 PETITIONERS/: (Complainant) (Accused persons) RESPONDENT: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Versus Sneha E. Wany, Wife of Divyesh Alnay Wany, aged about 25 years, R/o Shahdeo Nagar, P.S, Basantpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) Divyesh Alnay Wany, S/o Late E.F. Wany, aged about33 years, Vighottama Wany, widow of E.F. Wany, aged abut 70 years, Avnish Wany, S/o Late E.F. Wany, aged about 39 years, Ashish Wany, S/o Late E.F. Wany,aged about 39 years, Prabhat Wany, S/o Late E.F. Wany, aged about 35 years, Manjula @ Manju, wife of Ashish Wany, aged about 38 years, Att R/o Ward No.3, Jail Road, Isaipara, Mahasamund, P.S. & Distt. Mahasamund (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Police Station Basantpur, Distt. Rajnandgaon (C.G.) (Petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973) (SB: Hon'ble Mr. T.P. Sharma, J) Present: Mr. Vishnu Koshta, counsel for the petitioners along with all the petitioners. Mr. Rajendra Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the State/respondent. ORALORDER (4-8-2009) 1. The petitioners have filed this petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 24-10-2008 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon, in Criminal Case No.270/2006, whereby learned Judicial Magistrate First Class has rejected the application filed by the petitioners for compromise. 2. Report of the Registry perused. 3. Complainant Sneha E. Wany and petltioner No.2 Divyesh Alany Wany have entered into compromise with each other and they are living together along with other family members i.e. other petitioners. Report of the Registry reveals that they have entered into compromise voluntarily. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner placing reliance upon the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another {(2003) 4 SCC 675} submits that though in accordance with the provisions of Section320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure the offence under Section 498A of the I.P.C. is non- compoundable in nature yet the criminal proceedings initiated for the offence punishable under this section can be quashed by exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. Relevant portion of the said judgment is extracted below:- "14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relative to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper technical view would be counterproductive and would act againstinterests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Indian Penal Code. 15. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limitor affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code." 5. Thus according to the above cited dedsion of theApex Court it is the duty of the Court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes and the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. S.Permission is granted and as a result of compromise, criminal proceedings pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajnandgaon, in Criminal Case No.270/2006 are hereby quashed. 7. The petition is accordingly disposed of. 8. Consequently, I.A.Nos.l, 2, 3 & 4 stand disposed of. Sd/- T.P. Sharma Judge Soma