Ravi Nath Verma, J. - (1.) Invoking the inherent power of this Court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short "the Code"), the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report registered against the petitioners under Ss. 498 -A, 323, 504/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Ss. 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in connection with Dumka (Town) P.S. Case No. 74 of 2013 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 542 of 2013. The details of the facts is not required to be reproduced herein rather a brief statement of fact would be sufficient to adjudicate the issue involved in this case: At the instance of the Informant Shweta Garodia, the aforesaid case was filed with the allegation that her marriage was solemnized with Vikash Garodia (petitioner No. 3) on 9.7.2008 at Kolkata and in the said marriage, gold ornaments and other articles were given to the family of her husband and after marriage, she went to Bangalore where she was residing with her husband and other family members including in -laws. On 11.1.2010, she was blessed with a female child, but the child was physically abnormal since her birth and within hours of her birth, she had to undergo an expensive surgery and the doctor opined that she will have to undergo 3 -4 operation after few years and since thereafter, the informant was subjected to physical and mental torture at the hands of her husband and other family members of her in -laws and they also demanded money for treatment of the child. Since, her father was not in a position to pay Ten Lakh Rupees, she kept tolerating their torture. It is further alleged that on 31.3.2013, the petitioners assaulted the informant and tried to press her neck but on alarm raised by her, the neighbours came for her rescue. On intervention of Police, a meeting was held in Kolkata between the parents of the informant and the petitioners but it went in vain. On 18.4.2013, the petitioners brought the informant to Dumka where they demanded Rs. 10 lakhs from her father and when her father shown his inability to fulfill their demand, the petitioners hurled abuses and kicked her resulting she fell on the ground. Thereafter, the present case was lodged.
(2.) During pendency of this case, a joint compromise petition by way of interlocutory application bearing No. 4509 of 2015 was filed on 29.7.2015 with the prayer that with the intervention of well -wishers, parties have settled their dispute outside the Court and the opposite party No. 2/informant now does not want to proceed with the case and the parties have no grievance with each other and that they have settled their dispute amicably without any coercion and threat. As such, their prayer is to grant permission to compound the offence and entire criminal proceeding may be quashed.
(3.) It appears from the record that vide order dated 15.4.2014, notice was issued to the opposite party No. 2/the informant and in pursuance to that, she appeared in this case and thereafter filed the joint compromise petition.;