Vijay Bishnoi, J. - (1.) THIS Criminal Misc. Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners with a prayer for quashing the order dated 22.01.2014 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Didwana, District Nagaur (hereinafter referred to as 'the court below'), whereby the court below has directed the police to further investigate into the allegations levelled in the FIR No. 107/2013 dated 20.08.2013 of Police Station, Didwana, District Nagaur for the offence punishable under Sections 498 -A and 406 IPC. The petitioners have also prayed for quashing the above mentioned FIR.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has argued that during the course of the investigation into the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR, compromise has arrived at between the petitioners and the complainant -respondent No. 2 and the same has been verified by the police. Later on, an application has been filed by the complainant -respondent No. 2 for sending the matter for further investigation and the court below has passed the impugned order. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that once the matter has been compromised between the parties, the court below has erred in directing the police to further investigate into the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also argued that in fact on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, the petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 i.e. parents of the petitioner No. 1, have separated the petitioner No. 1 and the respondent No. 2 and they started residing in a separate house. Later on, on account of some disputes arose between the petitioner No. 1 and the complainant -respondent No. 2, she has moved an application claiming cancellation of the compromise. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioners that the allegations levelled in the impugned FIR are false as the petitioners have never committed any offence punishable under Section 498 -A and 406 IPC. Learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that complete dowry items have already been handed over to the complainant -respondent No. 2. On the strength of the above arguments, learned counsel for the petitioners has prayed for quashing the impugned order dated 22.01.2014 passed by the court below as well as the impugned FIR. Per contra, learned Public Prosecutor as well as learned counsel for the complainant -respondent No. 2 have opposed the prayer of the petitioners and has prayed that no case for quashing the impugned order as well as the impugned FIR is made out. It is also argued by learned counsel for the complainant -respondent No. 2 that though the petitioners have entered into the compromise with the complainant -respondent No. 2 but later on again they started harassing her and, therefore, she is forced to move application for cancellation of the compromise. It is also argued on behalf of the learned counsel for the complainant -respondent No. 2 that allegations levelled in the impugned FIR constitute prima facie case against the petitioners and, therefore, no interference is called for while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the rival parties as well as learned Public Prosecutor and perused the material available on record.;