- (1.) By way of this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity, 'the Code'), petitioners, the accused in FIR No.115 dated 01.08.2012 (Annexure P-1) recorded, under Sections 406, 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, 'IPC'), at Police Station, Urban Estate, Patiala, District Patiala, seek quashing of the aforesaid FIR by stating that the matter has been amicably settled between them and complainant/respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit in this regard. FIR (Annexure P-1) was recorded on the statement of Swapan Deep Kaur, respondent No.2, levelling allegations of demand of dowry and cruelty against the petitioners. Now, with the intervention of respectables, both the parties have compromised the matter of their own free will and have no grudge against each other. Both the parties had filed petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act, for dissolution of marriage between them for grant of decree of divorce by mutual consent. The said petition was accepted by District Judge Patiala, vide order dated 13.01.2014, Complainant/respondent No.2, who is being represented by her counsel, has no objection if the afore-stated FIR and proceedings arising therefrom are quashed, as she has settled the matter with the petitioners. State Counsel also does not object to acceptance of this petition and quashing of the afore-said FIR.
(2.) From the above it is established that the parties to the lis have resolved their inter se dispute amicably and have resolved to live in peace and harmony.
(3.) In B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana and Anr., 2003 4 SCC 675, the husband was one of the appellants while the wife was Respondent No. 2 in the appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. They were living separately for quite some time. An FIR was registered under Sections 498- A/323 and 406, IPC at the instance of the wife. When the criminal case registered at the instance of the wife was pending, the dispute between the husband and wife and their family members was settled. Wife filed an affidavit that her disputes with the husband and the other members of his family had been finally settled and she and her husband had agreed for mutual divorce. Based on the said affidavit, the matter was taken to the High Court by both the parties and they jointly prayed for quashing the criminal proceedings launched against the husband and his family members on the basis of the FIR registered at the wife's instance under Sections 498- A and 406, IPC. The High Court dismissed the petition for quashing the FIR as, in its view, the offences under Sections 498-A and 406, IPC were noncompoundable and the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code could not be invoked to by-pass Section 320 of the Code. It is from this order that the matter reached the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the Apex Court held that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers could quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code and held as under: "14. There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hypertechnical view would be counterproductive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Indian Penal Code. 15. In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers Under Section 482 of the Code.";