Dhanvir Singh vs Union Territory Of J&K
2021 Latest Caselaw 1513 j&K

                                                                    Sr. No. 82

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU
                                                          CRM(M) No. 473/2021


Dhanvir Singh                                         .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)
                        Through: Mr. R. P. Sapolia, Advocate.
                  Vs
Union Territory of J&K                                           ..... Respondent(s)
                        Through: Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, GA vice
                                 Mr. Aseem Sawhney, AAG for R-1
                                 Mr. P. S. Pawar, Advocate for R-2

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

The present petition has been filed by petitioner for quashing the charge-sheet

arising out of FIR No. 34/2014 registered with Police Station, Women Cell, Canal Road,

Jammu for offences under Sections 498-A, 109 IPC. It is submitted by the petitioner,

that the FIR was lodged by respondent No. 2 because of a marital discord and thereafter

a challan was also filed and the same is now pending before the Court of Passenger Tax

Mobile Magistrate, Jammu (hereinafter to be referred as the trial Court). It is further

submitted that the marriage between the petitioner and respondent No. 2 has been

dissolved by decree of divorce passed under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act by the

Court of Additional District Judge, Matrimonial Cases, Jammu.

Mr. R. P. Sapolia, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner submits

regarding the settlement between the petitioner and respondent No. 2, a compromise

agreement dated 22.01.2020 too has been placed on record in which it has been stated

by the respondent No. 2 that she will assist the petitioner in quashing the challan

pending before the trial Court. A perusal of the judgment dated 20.05.2021 reiterates the

same statement of the respondent No. 2.

Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, GA appearing vice Mr. Aseem Sawhney submits that

appropriate orders may be passed.

Mr. P. S. Pawar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent No. 2

submits that the parties have settled the dispute and he has instructions to make

statement with regard to compromise executed between the petitioner and respondent

No. 2.

As the dispute between the parties is a marital dispute and the same has been

settled by way of an agreement and even the marriage was dissolved, so the continuation

of proceedings shall be an exercise in futility.

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.

In view of what has been said above, criminal proceedings against the

petitioner pertaining to charge-sheet arising out of FIR No. 34/2014 registered with

Police Station, Women Cell, Canal Road, Jammu registered under Sections 498-A, 109

IPC pending before the learned trial Court stand quashed.

Disposed of.

(RAJNESH OSWAL) JUDGE

Jammu 23.11.2021 Sahil Padha