K.C. Sharma, J. - (1.) Heard counsel for the parties. The matrimonial dispute between the parties which resulted into criminal proceedings u/ss. 498-A, 406, 420 & 120-B IPC against the accused-petitioners pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate No. 13, Jaipur City, Jaipur has been settled amicably and the parties have entered into compromise.
(2.) It appears from the contents of the petition that the complainant-petitioner has withdrawn the application filed before the Family Court for grant of maintenance. She has also received an amount of Rs. 62,000/- as against full and final settlement. The parties have also filed an application seeking decree of divorce by mutual consent. Having compromised the matter, the complainant and the accused-petitioners filed an application before the trial Court for attesting compromise, but the trial Court vide its order dated 20.5.2005 declined to attest the compromise in view of the bar created by Section 320 Cr.P.C. It was in these circumstances that the complainant-petitioner and the accused-petitioners have jointly filed this petition u/s. 482 Cr.P.C.
(3.) It is well settled that while exercising inherent jurisdiction the Court should encourage genuine settlements of the cases arising out of matrimonial disputes. While considering the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A their Lordships of the Supreme Court in B.S. Joshi & Ors. v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 have observed as under : "There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing See. 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 to her - relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hyper technical 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 setling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Indian Penal Code.";