LUKESH SONKAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Facts in brief required for the disposal of the instant petition are that Criminal Case No. 503/2012 (State v. Lukesh Sonkar and two Ors.) under Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code is pending before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Raipur. The police investigated the matter and filed charge-sheet on First Information Report lodged by the complainant Smt. Durga Sonkar against applicants Lukesh Sonkar, husband of the complainant, Dhaniram Sonkar and Meera Bai, father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant. Charges have been framed and the matter was listed for recording of the statement of the prosecution witnesses. In the said criminal case, the complainant and the accused persons have filed an application under the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code" ) praying that the complainant and the accused persons have amicably settled their dispute, they may be permitted to compound the matter and the said criminal case may be closed by acquitting the accused applicants. The trial Court vide order dated 14-10-2015 dismissed the said application on the ground that the charge framed under Section 498A of the IPC is of non-compoundable nature. After the said order the accused/applicants have preferred the instant petition wherein it is submitted that as the matter is matrimonial and the parties have entered into an amicable settlement and compromised the matter, inherent power of this Court under of Section 482 of the Code is attracted. Section 320 of the Code does not limit the power of this Court for quashment of the entire proceedings in the light of such compromise and as both the parties amicably settled their dispute also the applicant/accused prayed before this Court that by invoking inherent power of this Court the prayer may be accepted and in the light of the settlement between the parties, the same be accepted and criminal proceedings pending before the trial Court be quashed by acquitting the applicants/accused. Applicant No. 1 in person along with other applicants through their counsel and the complainant Smt. Durga Sonkar along with her counsel appeared before this Court and prayed that as they have filed the said petition mutually agreed and compromised and their statement may be recorded. This Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to record their statement for the compromise and other facts. Their statements were recorded before Registrar (Judl.) wherein they deposed that they have entered into a compromise without fear, favour or threat and complainant Smt. Durg Sonkar prayed that complaint case pending against her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law may be closed in the light of mutual compromise. Registrar (Judl.) recorded their statement on 10-3-2016.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the applicants. Learned counsel placed reliance upon the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and Ors. v. State of Haryana and Anr, 2003 4 SCC 675 wherein it is held in paragraphs 14 and 15 as under :