Amit Talukdar, J. - (1.) This application has been filed on behalf of the aforesaid petitioners who have been charge-sheeted in connection with G.R. Case No. 79 of 2001 for the offences punishable under Sections 323/498A/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 & 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act on the basis of First Information Report lodged by the Opposite Party No. 2.
(2.) The prayer has been made in this application for quashing on the merit of the First Information Report lodged by the Opposite Party No. 2. At the time of moving this application, the learned Advocate for the petitioner abandoned the prayer on merit but submitted that since compromise has already been effected between the petitioners and the Opposite Party No. 2, this Court should quash the proceeding. He has referred to an ex parte decree of divorce passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, and as also the letter written to the Officer-in-Charge of the Asansol Police Station on 2.3 2001 intimating the desire of the Opposite Party No. 2 to compromise with the petitioners. He has further referred to a petition filed before the Additional Judicial Commissioner at Ranchi in connection with Matrimonial Title Suit No. 22/2000 wherein the Opposite Party No. 2 who had earlier filed an application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure for setting aside the ex parte decree of divorce and has also withdrawn the said application under Order 9 Rule 13 on the ground that there had been an effective compromise and the petitioners have paid a substantial amount to the Opposite Party No. 2.
(3.) Relying on the aforesaid circumstances, and the documents which formed part of the application, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that the proceeding should be quashed by this Court and more so when the Opposite Party No. 2 had filed the First Information Report on 1.12.2000 and as the decree was passed on 23.8.2000, she was not the wife on the said date. As such no case under Section 498A could be registered.;