N.L.TIBREWAL, J. - (1.) BY this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioner challenges the order dated August 9, 1990 passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate No. 6, Jaipur City, Jaipur in Criminal Case No. 368/89 whereby charge under Section 498A IPC has been framed against him.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case for purposes of this petition may be stated as under. The non -petitioner No. 2 Smt. Urmila was married to the petitioner on November 22, 1983. It appears that the marriage was not successful and a divorce petition was also filed by the petitioner under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act. During the pendency of divorce petition, the wife non - petitioner No. 2 made a report at the police station Mahila Thana, Jaipur on July 26, 1989 wherein she made allegations of treating her with cruelty by the petitioner and his other relatives. On this report, criminal case was registered under Section 498A IPC against the petitioner and his other family members. However, after completion of investigation a charge sheet came to be filed against the petitioner only for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC. Thereafter, a charge was framed under Section 498A IPC on August 9, 1980 and this order is under challenge in this petition.
(3.) THE learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner has produced before the Court a certified copy of the order dated September 24, 1994 passed by the learned Judge, Family Court, Jaipur whereby a decree of divorce has been passed on mutual consent of the parties. It also appears that the petitioner has paid a sum of Rs. 1,90,000/ - to the wife non -petitioner No. 2 as permanent alimony for herself and for her minor daughter. In the consent petition, it was also admitted by the wife that she had received all the items of her Estri -Dhan. It is, thus, clear that both the parties have chosen to lead a fresh life after obtaining a consent divorce decree. The allegations made in the complaint were of general nature and it appears that the criminal case was instituted against the petitioner as a counter blast for the proceedings initiated by him for divorce. Taking into consideration the totality of all the facts and circumstances of the case and the evidence on record as well as the subsequent developments as stated above, I am of the opinion that this petition deseves to be allowed.;