[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR O R D E R S.B. CRIMINAL MISC. PETITION NO. 1767/2006 MUKESH KUMAR PUJARI & ANR. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ANR. Date: 12.02.2008. HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE None present for the petitioner. **** The instant criminal misc. petition is directed against the order dated 03.07.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) & Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chirawa in Criminal Case No. 211/2004, by which the Court below has rejected the application of the accused-petitioners for dropping the proceedings under Section 498-A. Brief facts of the case are that the accused- petitioners and respondent No.2 wife have come to a compromise and the respondent No.2 who filed an application under Section 125 Cr.P.C., has also withdrawn and they have no grievance with each other and the petitioner No.1 husband as well as respondent No.2 wife are living together. Therefore, a common application was filed by the accused-petitioners and the respondent No.2 before the trial Court and prayed for attestation of compromise for the offence under [2] Section 406 IPC. The trial Court allowed the application and attested the compromise for the offence under Section 406 IPC. Thereafter on 03.07.2006 an application for attestation of compromise was filed by the accused-petitioners and respondent No.2 for the offence under Section 498-A IPC, but the trial Court refused to attest the compromise vide order impugned dated 03.07.2006 as the offence under Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable. I have considered the averments made in the misc. petition and carefully gone through the order impugned dated 03.07.2006 passed by the trial Court as also the compromise submitted by the accused- petitioners and respondent No.2. As per the compromise, they are living together. Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, AIR 2003 SC 1386, has observed that Section 498-A is enacted to prevent torture to woman by her husband or his relatives- Proceedings initiated by wife under Section 498-A against her husband and his relatives- Subsequently she settled her disputes with husband and his relations- Wife and husband agreed for mutual divorce- Application filed by wife for quashing proceedings initiated by her against husband and his [3] relatives- Refusal to exercise inherent powers by High Court- Not proper as it would prevent women from settling earlier and that is not the object of Chapter XXA of Penal Code. Having considered the averments made in the misc. petition and upon careful perusal of the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of B.S. Joshi and others (supra) and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it will be futile exercise to continue with the criminal proceedings as the complainant-respondent No.2 wife herself does not want to pursue her complaint. Consequently, the present criminal misc. petition is allowed. The complaint, further criminal proceedings against the petitioners in Criminal Case No. 211/2004 pending before the trial Court for the offence under Section 498-A IPC and the order impugned dated 03.07.2006 passed by the Civil Judge (Jr. Division) & Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Chirawa are hereby quashed and set-aside. (K.S. RATHORE)J. /KKC/