HI6H COURT OF CHHATTISQARH AT BILASPUR Cr. M.P. No.547/2009 PETITIONERS RESPONDENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. Versus 1, 2. Lat Shrikesh Kuiiiar, S/o Shankar Gupta, Aged about 34 years. Shankar Lal, S/o Pradiunan Prasad Gupta, Aged about 55 years. Brajesli Kuinar, S/o Shankar Lal Gupta, Aged about 28 years. Umadevi, W/o Shankar Lal Gupta, Aged about 53 years. AU R/o Bhartiya Nagar, Ayappa Mandir Road, P.S. CivilLiae, Bilaspur (C.G.) State of Chhattisgarh, Through Police Slation Cinl Liue, BUaspur. Smt. Siunedha Gupta, W/o Shrikesh Gupta, Aged about 30 years, R/o Rataapur, P.S. Rataiipur. Tahsil S;, District Bilaspur (C.G.) CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS PBTITION UNDER SECTION 482 OF THE CO^IBOFLCRIMINALPROCEDURE. :Hoa'Me Mr. T.P.Sharma, J.) Present:-. Shri Aryind Kumar Dubey, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri Avinash K. Misiira, P.L. for the State/respondent N0. 1. Shri Dharmesh Shrivastava, Advocate forthe respondent N0. 2. QRAL-ORDER (Passedoa 04/11/2009} 1, The petitioners have filed this petition for quashing the proceediags pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, in Criminal Case No,470/09 for offence purushable under Sections 498A read wifh Section 34 offhe I.P.C. and also the order dated 13- 10-2009 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, BUaspur ia Criminal Case No.470/09, whereby leamed Judicial Magistrate First Class has rejected fhe prayer for coiapoiindiag the offence. 2. Report of the Registay perused. 3. Leamed counsel for fhe petitioners placing reUaace upon the judgmeut offhe Apex Court in the matter ofB.S. Joshi and others v. State ofHaryaaa and another {(2003) 4 SCC 675} submits fhat though ia accordance with fhe provisions of Section 320 of the Code .y^\ 4. 5, of Crimiaal Procedure fhe offence Tiader Section 498A ofthe I.P.C. are non-compouadable in nature yet the criminal proceediags initiated for the ofFence punishable under this section cau be quaslied by exercisiag jurisdiction under Section 482 ofthe Cr.P.C. Relevant portion offhe said judgnient is extracted below:- "14. There is no doubt fbat the object of iatroducia^ Chapter XX-A coataiaiug Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent torture to a womaa by her husbaad or by relatives of ber husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husbaud aad his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or ber relative to satisfy unlawful deniands of dowiy. The hyper techaical view would be counterproductive and would act agaiast interests of woinen aad against the object for which ttus provision was added. There is eveiy likelihood fhat non-exercise of iaherent power to quash the proceediugs to nieet the euds of justi.cc would preveat women froin setfLmg earUer. That is not fhe object of Chapter XX-A offhe Indiaa Peual Code. 15, In view of fhe above discussion, we hold that ffae High Court ia exercise of its mherent powers can quash cruniaal proceediugs or FIR or coinplaint aad Section 320 of the Code does not 1imit or affect the powers under Section 482 ofthe Code." Thus according to fhe above cited decision of the Apex Court it is the duty of fhe Court to encoiirage geiitiiae settlements of luatTunouial disputes and the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure do not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of fhe Code of Criminal Procedure. In the instant case, petitioner No.l & respondent No.2 are husband 8s wife, they have decided to end fheir marital relatious. Now there is no chance of amicable setUement betweea petitioner No.l & respondent No.2 for liviag together and pardes have filed a joiat appUcation for pennission to coinpound the ofifence categoricatly stating fhereia fhat petitioner No.l & respondeut No,2 are Uviag separately aud peacefuUy leading their respective Uves, and the disputes aad grievances between them have been. settled without aay pressure aad fear. iass>i;& ?- In view of the aforementioned pronouucement of the Apex Court aad the fact that Fetitioner No.l & respondent No.2 have settled fheir disputes aniicably wifhout pressure or fear, it would be in fhe tnterest of justice to allow the petition aad quash criraiaal proceediugs pendiag before Judicial Magistrate First Class, BUaspuT. Consequently, the petition is atlowed and the criiuiaal proceediags pendiug in fhe Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, in Criminal Case No.470/09 are hereby quashed. I.A. No. 01 ftius staads disposed of. — T. P. Sharma Judge ri