Appeal against order dismissing petition to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A IPC arising out of matrimonial dispute. Court allowed quashment based on compromise and full settlement.
Proceedings in CC.No.327 of 2008 before the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad are quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL PETITION No.9526 of 2010
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., seeking to quash the further proceedings in CC.No.327 of 2008 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad.
The brief facts of the case are that the marriage between the 1st petitioner and the 1st respondent was solemnized on 28.03.2008. Subsequently, alleging harassment in the hands of the petitioners herein, who are none other than the husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law, the 1st respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioners before the Women P.S. C.C.S., Hyderabad, on the basis of which a case in Crime No.108 of 2008 was registered against the petitioners, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The police, after investigation, filed the charge sheet before the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, and the same was taken cognizance in C.C.No.327 of 2008.
The 1st respondent i.e., the wife also filed O.P.No.618 of 2009 on the file of the Family Court, Hyderabad, under Section 13 (1) of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking divorce, and the same is pending. During pendency of these matters, it appears the parties have entered into compromise, which was reduced into writing. Since there was amicable settlement between the parties and the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. is compoundable, the petitioners and the
1st respondent have approached this Court and filed the present petition.
Today, the petitioners/accused and respondent No.1, who is the defacto-complainant, are present before this Court. When questioned, Respondent No.1 stated that she has compromised with the petitioners/accused and that she has no objection if the proceedings against the petitioners herein pending in C.C.No.327 of 2008 on the file of XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, are quashed.
The terms and conditions of the compromise entered into between the parties read as under:
2. The petitioner no.1 shall give consent and has no objection for grant of divorce pending in O.P. 618/2009 before Hon’ble Judge, Family Court, Hyderabad.
3. The petitioners herein have paid Rs.36,00,000/(Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs only) to the de-facto complainant/Respondent No.1 towards permanent alimony by way of Demand Drafts drawn on State Bank of India, Dwarakanagar Branch, Vishakapatnam, in favour of the Defacto complainant/Respondent No.1 vide D.D.Nos. 790371, 790372, 790373 and 790374 dated 20.09.2010 of Rs.9,00,000/- each, total amounting to Rs.36,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty Six Lakhs only) and the same is acknowledged by Defacto complainant/Respondent No.1.
4. The Petitioners and the respondent No.1 have exchanged their gifted articles and belonging as per the
list and acknowledged.
5. The de-facto complainant/Respondent No.1 has no claim, right against the petitioner No.1 to 3 in whatsoever manner in future and vice-versa.
6. The petitioners & the de-facto complainant/Respondent No.1 have unconditionally withdrawn their allegation and counter allegations made against each other in C.C.No.327/2008 and in O.P.No.618 of 2009.”
In the light of the fact that there has been a compromise between the parties and the offence punishable under Section 498-A of I.P.C. is compoundable, I am of the considered view that it is a fit case to quash further proceedings against the petitioners/Accused in C.C.No.327 of 2008 on the file of the XIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, by invoking the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and, accordingly, the same is quashed.
In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed.
________________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA,J
24.09.2010. v v
2 issues framed by the court
Whether further proceedings in CC No.327 of 2008 can be quashed on account of settlement between the parties?
Whether Section 498-A IPC offence is compoundable and amenable for quashing?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
nullReferred
nullApplied
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioners
Respondent No.1
GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
