DHARAMSHOBHA DEVI Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are respectively the husband and wife, due to some matrimonial acrimony petitioner No. 1 (wife) lodged an FIR with P.S. Rynjah alleging therein that her husband (petitioner No. 2) and her in-laws Shri Asarfi Rai, Smti. Geeta Devi and Shri Krishna Rai were torturing her mentally and physically right from the day of marriage i.e., from the year 2012. It is also alleged that dowry was demanded and was threatened to be burnt and killed. The case was registered and on completion of investigation, charge sheet stand filed. Presently trial is in progress before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, East Khasi Hills, Shillong where the case is registered as G.R. Case No. 278 (A) 2015 under Sections 498-A/506/323/34 IPC read with Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

(2.) The petitioners (husband and wife) have filed the instant petition so as to invoke the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In the memo of the petition it has been projected that now the relationship between the husband and wife (petitioners) is restored, they are living peacefully, therefore, for avoiding disturbance to their matrimonial life and their relationship they have sorted out their internal differences. The continuation of the trial may have adverse impact on their matrimonial life and also the relationship of the petitioner No. 1 with her in-laws.

(3.) It is a matter of concern that petitioner No. 1 appears to have been pushed to the wall, it is only then she resorted to lodging of criminal proceedings against her husband and the in-laws. It shall be premature to comment as to whether same is true or not, same would surface only on completion of the trial. Be that as it may, now the question is as to whether petitioners can be permitted to seek quashment of the case, the answer has to be in affirmative. No doubt the offences as allegedly committed for which the petitioner No. 2 along with his relatives are facing trial are non-compoundable but in case of matrimonial disputes/offences to allow the petition will enable the parties to live peacefully. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Jitendra Raghuvanshi and Ors. v. Babita Raghuvanshi and Anr.: (2013) 4 SCC 58 has ruled that it is the duty of the courts to encourage genuine settlements of such disputes. Paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 of the judgment are advantageous to be quoted,