Suraj Parkash Sagotra And Another vs State Of J&K And Another
2021 Latest Caselaw 806 j&K

                                                                                      Sr. No. 223
                                                                               (After Notice Cause list)



                   HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                                   AT JAMMU


                                                                   CRMC No.502/2014
                                                                   IA No. 590/2014
                                                                   IA No. 94/2015

              Suraj Parkash Sagotra and another                       .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
                                          Through: Mr. Rohit Kohli, Advocate
                                     Vs
              State of J&K and another                                          ..... Respondent(s)
                                          Through: Mr. Vikas Magotra, Advocate for R-3
                                                   Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG for R-1&2


              Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
                                                       ORDER

03.08.2021

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners who happen to

be parents in law of respondent No. 3 for quashing of FIR bearing No. 89/2014

dated 25.09.2014 registered with Police Station, Women Cell, Canal Road,

Jammu for commission of offences under section 498-A/109 RPC.

2. During the course of hearing, copy of decree sheet and award have

been placed before the Court and the same is taken on record.

3. Mr. Rohit Kohli, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that

during the pendency of this petition, respondent No. 3 and her husband have

parted their ways and the marriage has been dissolved by decree of divorce

passed under section 15 of the J&K Hindu Marriage Act, 1980 vide decree

dated 25.04.2018. It is further stated that the proceedings initiated by

respondent No. 3 under Domestic Violence Act have been settled and by virtue

NEHA KUMARI 2021.08.03 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

of award dated 11.02.2017, respondent No. 3 has withdrawn the said

proceedings.

4. Mr. Vikas Magotra, learned counsel for respondent No. 3 submits

that there is nothing outstanding between the petitioners and respondent No. 3.

Mr. Vikas Magotra, Advocate was asked to produce respondent No. 3 before

this Court but he submits that respondent No. 3 is living at Mumbai and it is

not possible for her to come and he has been authorized to make submission

before this Court with regard to settlement of dispute including FIR in

question.

5. Mr. Aseem Sawhney, learned AAG submits that he has no objection

in the event, FIR in question is quashed in case the parties have settled their

dispute.

6. Heard and perused the record.

7. As per decree sheet, respondent No. 3 has received a sum of Rs.

2,00,000/- as permanent alimony as future maintenance. In view of this, this

Court is the considered view that once husband of respondent No. 3 and

respondent No. 3 have settled their dispute, the continuance of the said FIR in

which the husband of respondent No. 3 is also one of the accused shall be

nothing but an abuse of process of law.

8. Law is well settled that if the parties have settled their disputes

amicably, then the criminal proceedings whether arising out of private

complaint or out of FIR for commission of offences under sections 498-A RPC

can be quashed notwithstanding the fact that the section 498-A RPC is non-

NEHA KUMARI 2021.08.03 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

compoundable. Reliance is placed upon a judgment of the Apex Court in case,

titled, Jatinder Raghuvanshi and ors. v Babita Raghuvanshi and anr.

reported in 2013 (4) SCC 58, in which it has been held that even if the

offences are non compoundable, if they are relate to matrimonial disputes and

the Court is satisfied that the parties have settled the dispute amicably and

without any pressure, then section 320 of the Code would not be a bar to the

exercising of power of quashing of FIR, complaint or the subsequent criminal

proceedings.

9. In view of the amicable settlement arrived at between the

petitioners and respondent No. 3, criminal proceedings in FIR. 89/2014 dated

25.09.2014 registered with Police Station, Women Cell, Canal Road for

commission of offences under sections 498A and 109 RPC against the

petitioners, are quashed.

10. The present petition is, accordingly, disposed of along with

connected IA.

(Rajnesh Oswal) Judge Jammu 03.08.2021 Neha

Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: No

NEHA KUMARI 2021.08.03 17:31 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document