Criminal Case No. 34839 of 2022 · Madhya Pradesh High Court · 2022

KRISHNA GOPAL KUSHWAHA S/O LATE SHRI BHOLA PRASAD KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 64 YEARS, OCCUPATION: GOVERNMENT SERVANT POSTED AT RAIPUR (C.G.) R/O HOUSE NO. 90, BHIM NAGAR, GWARIGHAT ROAD, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) KU. MONIKA SINGH D/O SHRI KRISHNA GOPAL KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS, OCCUPATION: STUDENT R/O HOUSE NO.90 BHIM NAGAR GWARIGHAT ROAD JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH) RAJKUMAR PATEL S/O LATE SHRI BABULAL PATEL, AGED ABOUT 49 YEARS, R/O HOUSE NO 58, ESTATE NARMADA ROAD, JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) IDEAL SMT. SAVITRI PATEL W/O LATE SHRI BABULAL PATEL, AGED ABOUT 77 YEARS, OCCUPATION: HOUSEWIFE R/O HOUSE NO 58, IDEAL ESTATE

5. Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 9/29/2022 4:34:28 PM NARMADA ROAD, JABALPUR (M.P.) (MADHYA PRADESH) 2

6. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER POLICE STATION MAHILA JABALPUR DISTRICT JABALPUR (MADHYA PRADESH) THANA (SHRI YOGESH MOHAN GURU, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS. 1 TO 5) (MS. NALINI GURUNG, PANEL LAWYER FOR RESPONDENT NO.6) .....RESPONDENTS This application coming on for settlement this day, the court passed the following: ORDER Heard on I.A.No.14317/2022, which is an application to delete the name of respondent No.5 Smt. Savitri Patel. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant No.5 Smt. Savitri Patel has died on 17/08/2020, so he may be permitted to delete the name of respondent No.5 Smt. Savitri Patel from the array of respondent. On due consideration, application is allowed. Applicant is permitted to delete the name of respondent No.5 Smt. Savitri Patel from the array of respondent. Let needful be done during course of day. With the consent of parties, matter is heard finally. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceeding of RCT No.7289/2019 pending before JMFC, Jabalpur arising out from the charge-sheet filed by the police after investigation of the Crime No.78/2019 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 34 of the IPC and Section 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 9/29/2022 4:34:28 PM 3 A s per prosecution case on the report of complainant /applicant Smt. Madhvi Singh wife of respondent No.1 Kapil Singh Police registered Crime No.78/2019 for the offence punishable under Section 498-A, 34 of the IPC and Sections 3, 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against respondent Nos. 1 to 4. As the parties have entered into compromise, so applicant/complainant filed this petition to quash that FIR . It appears from the record that this Court vide order dated 22/08/2022 directed the Registrar (J-II) to verify the factum of compromise and the Registrar (J-II) in its report dated 25/08/2022 has stated that applicant and respondent Nos.1 to 4 admitted that they have amicably settled their dispute. I t is true that Sections involved in the case are non-compoundable offence. However, the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh V/s. State of Punjab and another reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303, held as under :- " T h e power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. Cases where power to quash criminal proceedings may be exercised where the parties have settled their dispute, held, depends on facts and circumstances of each case. Before exercise of inherent quashment power under Section 482, High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime and its societal impact. Offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or like transactions or offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry etc. or family disputes where the wrong is basically private or Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 9/29/2022 4:34:28 PM personal in nature and parties have resolved their entire dispute, High 4 Court may quash criminal proceedings." The aforesaid dictum stands reiterated by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh & others V/s. State of Punjab & others, (2014) 6 SCC 466, the pertinent observations of the Apex Court in Narinder Singh (Supra) are as under:- "In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings: Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves." I n this case also it appears that dispute between the applicant and respondent Nos.1 to 4 is a family dispute, which was amicably settled between them. Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 9/29/2022 4:34:28 PM So, in the light of the above mentioned Apex Court judgment on the basis 5 of aforesaid compromise which is taken place between the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose is going to be served by keeping the matter pending especially when the grievance of the complainant/applicant has been satisfied by the respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Resultantly, the proceedings of RCT No.7289/2019 pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur arising out from the charge-sheet filed by the police after investigation of the Crime No.78/2019 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Jabalpur for the offence punishable under Sections 498-A, 34 of the IPC and Section 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act is hereby quashed. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of. (RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signed by: ANURAG SONI Signing time: 9/29/2022 4:34:28 PM