MILAP CHANDRA JAIN, J. - (1.) THIS is a petition moved under Section 482, Cr.P.C. against the order of the learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 3 Jodhpur dated 22.2.1990 by which he has refused to record compromise for the offences punishable under Section 498A, IPC. The facts of the case giving rise to this petition may be summarised thus.
(2.) ON the report of the petitioner, a challan was filed against the non -petitioners under Sections 448, 498A and 120B IPC on February 22, 1990, a compromise petition Was moved by the parties before the learned Magistrate stating that compromise has been effected between them, there exists now no disputed in between the petitioner's daughter Mst. Tara has started living with her husband Daulal (non -petitioner No. 4) for the last four years and during this period she has given birth to a male child and it has, been prayed that the accused -petitioners may be acquitted on the basis of the compromise. The learned Magistrate recorded the compromise under section 448, IPC but refused to record the compromise under Sections 498A and 120B, IPC as they were not compoundable.
(3.) IT may be mentioned here that during the pendency of the petition, the petitioner Jai Singh has died and his Legal representatives have moved an application on April 4, 1991 for substituting their names in his place. It is contended by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the dispute was in between Mst. Tara and her husband Daulal. They have started living happily together since the year 1984 and under the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Magistrate should have accorded permission for compromising the offences punishable under Sections 120B and 498A, IPC. He relied upon Mahesh Chandra v. State of Rajasthan : 1988CriLJ121 and Ramkishor v. State of Rajasthan 1989 R.C.C. 142.;