- (1.) Matrimonial dispute that resulted into a criminal case under Sections 498-A and 406, IPC, has been ultimately settled amicably and the complainant-wife did not want to continue with the criminal case. But Section 320, Cr. P.C. came in the way and learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 5, Kota vide order dated October 15, 2003 declined to recognise the settlement.
(2.) It is well settled that while exercising inherent powers under Section 482, Cr. P.C., it is the duty of the Court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes. In B. S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 : (2003 Cri LJ 2028), their Lordships of Supreme Court indicated thus : '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 interest 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."
(3.) I am satisfied that parties, in the instant matter, have genuinely settled their matrimonial dispute and intervention under Section 482, Cr. P.C. in the interest of justice appears necessary.;