ANIL RAJ PREM SAGAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned High Court Government Pleader is directed to take notice on behalf of the 1st respondent-State.

(2.) PETITIONER 1 herein is the husband of 2nd respondent and petitioner 2 is her mother-in- law. He has sought for quashing of entire proceedings in C.C. No. 24833 of 2008 pending on the file of the XI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(3.) SINCE the petitioners on the one side and the 2nd respondent on the other, have got their matrimonial dispute settled amicably no purpose would be served. In the case of B.S. Joshi and Others v. State of Haryana and Another ILR 2003 Kar 1785 (SC): AIR 2003 SC 1386 : (2003) 4 SCC 675 : 2003 Cri LJ 2028 (SC): 2003 SCC (Cri) 848, Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid down that where both the parties to a matrimonial dispute approach the High Court and file a petition jointly praying for quashing the FIR, High Court would be justified in quashing the FIR in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, even though the offences are not compoundable. It is observed at para 8 that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 of the Cr. P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case.