Vijay Bishnoi, J. - (1.) THIS criminal misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners with the prayer for setting aside the order dated 18.03.2015 as well as for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioners before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 2, Udaipur (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Regular Case No. 844/2014 (State of Rajasthan v. Abhishek & Ors.), whereby the trial court vide order dated 18.03.2015 has attested the compromise for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC but refused to attest the compromise for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A IPC as the same is not compoundable.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case are that in the instant case, the respondent No. 2 had filed a complaint in the trial court and the said complaint was forwarded to the Police Station, Mahila, District Udaipur under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. and the police has registered the FIR No. 106/2014 against the petitioners. After investigation, the police filed charge sheet against the petitioners for the offences punishable under Sections 406 and 498 -A IPC in the trial court wherein the trial is pending against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences. During the pendency of the trial, a joint application was preferred on behalf of the petitioners as well as the respondent No. 2 while stating that both the parties have entered into compromise and, therefore, the proceedings pending against the petitioners may be terminated. The trial court vide order dated 18.03.2015 allowed the parties to compound the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC, however, rejected the application so far it relates to compounding the offence punishable under Section 498 -A IPC. The present criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the said proceedings pending against them.
(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has argued that as the complainant -respondent No. 2 and the petitioners have already entered into compromise and on the basis of it, the petitioners have been acquitted for the offence punishable under Section 406 IPC, there is no possibility of conviction of the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A IPC. It is also argued that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial against the petitioners for the offence punishable under Section 498 -A IPC because the same may derail the compromise arrived at between the parties.;