Deepak Gupta vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 13711 MP

                           1
        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                     AT GWALIOR
                           BEFORE
               HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ROHIT ARYA
                  ON THE 17th OF OCTOBER, 2022

     MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL CASE No. 47937 of 2022

       BETWEEN:-
1.     DEEPAK GUPTA S/O SHRI ASHOK GUPTA,
       AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
       PRIVATE   JOB    I-33  LAXMIPURAM
       TRANSPORT     NAGAR     BAHODAPUR
       DISTRICT GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.     ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA S/O LATE SHRI
       RAM BABU GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 62
       Y E A R S , OCCUPATION:  BUSINESS
       KANCHAN MARKET HOUSE NO. 35 SADAR
       BAZAR     DISTRICT BHIND (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

3.     SMT. REKHA RANI GUPTA W/O SHRI
       ASHOK KUMAR GUPTA, AGED ABOUT 57
       Y E A R S , OCCUPATION:  HOUSE  WIFE
       KANCHAN MARKET HOUSE NO. 35 SADAR
       BAZAR       DISTRICT  BHIND  (MADHYA
       PRADESH)

4.     SMT. NAMITA GUPTA W/O SHRI SATYAM
       GUPTA,  AGED    ABOUT    29   YEARS,
       OCCUPATION: HOUSE WIFE VILLAGE GANJ
       TEHSIL      RAJNAGAR        DISTRICT
       CHATTARPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                 .....PETITIONER
       (BY SHRI VIVEK SAXENA - ADVOCATE )

       AND
1.     THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
       INCHARGE POLICE STATION THROUGH
       POLICE   THANA   PADAV   DISTRICT
       GWALIOR (MADHYA PRADESH)

2.     SMT. RAKHI GUPTA W/O SHRI DEEPAK
       GUPTA,  AGED   ABOUT   32  YEARS,
                           2
        OCCUPATION: PRIVATE SERVICE B-58
        KARMCHARI AVAS      VIKAS COLONY
        MAHALGAON CITY CENTER GWALIOR
        (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                       .....RESPONDENTS
        (BY SHRI NITIN GOYAL - LEARNED PANEL LAWYER FOR
        THE RESPONDENT-STATE
        SHRI UPENDRA SHRIVAS, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
        COMPLAINANT )

      This application coming on for hearing this day, the court passed
the following:
                                  ORDER

This M.Cr.C. under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C is directed against the impugned order dated 20/09/2022 by which the Trial Court has declined to waive of the cooling period off six months, as contemplated

in amended Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C referable under Section 498-A of the IPC where under the said offence earlier non compoundable, has been made compoundable but with the condition that minimum period of six months should elapse from the date of application for compounding the offence but same shall be in the interest of woman.

Factual background led to filing of the application under amended Section 320 (2) of the Cr.P.C is to the effect that marriage between the applicant and complainant was solemnized on 24/06/2019. However, due to mental incompatibility, both parties could not live long as married couple and separated themselves since October, 2020.

It also appears that complainant lodged an FIR at Crime No. 241/2021 at Police Station Mahila Thana Padav, Gwalior (M.P.) against the applicant and other family members under Section 498-A of the IPC and other sections.

With the passage of time, wisdom prevailed upon the parties and both of them decided to resolve the dispute and differences between them on the principle that if they can not live as friend, they should depart like friends. Under such circumstances, a joint application was filed with the prayer waiving of the cooling period of six months and for compounding the offence. The Trial Court declined to do for want of authority in law under the amended provision (Supra).

Counsel for the applicant and counsel for the complaint submits that similar provision of cooling off period is also provided under Section 13B of the Hindu Marriage Act, before grant of decree of divorce on mutual consent. The Hon'ble Supreme Court while interpreting the said provision has ruled that requirement of observing of six months cooling period is not mandatory and therefore in the given case, the concerned Court may consider to waive off cooling period in the interest of justice and parties. He relies upon the judgment of Amardeep Singh Vs Harveer Kaur delivered AIR 2017 4417.

Counsel for the parties submits that this Court may consider to invoke the inherent jurisdiction for waiving off cooling period in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Amardeep Singh (Supra).

Submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties duly considered. There is no cavil of doubt that applicant and complainant are

before this Court through their respective counsel. Both of them are praying for cooling off the period of six months and for compounding the

offence of 498-A of the IPC so that they may pursue their petition for divorce on mutual consent filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the competent Court and the same is pending.

In the peculiar facts and circumstances, this court finds substantial force in the submission of counsel for the parties.

Hence, relying upon the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Amardeep Singh (Supra) six months cooling off period as contemplated under the amended Section 320(2) of the Cr.P.C provided for compounding the offence under Section 498-A of the IPC is hereby waived off.

The Trial Court is directed to proceed to complete the proceedings of compounding offence in accordance with law.

With the aforesaid observation, the M.Cr.C. stands disposed of.

(ROHIT ARYA) JUDGE Prachi

PRACHI MISHRA 2022.10.17 19:30:45 +05'30'