BHIM BAHADUR Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the request of learned counsel for the parties, they are heard finally. This petition is under section 482 CrPC. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that they are husband and wife. A police case was registered against applicant No. 1 Bhim Bahadur on the report of applicant No. 2 Smt. Anita Soni, under section 498-A and 506 IPC. Good senses prevailed in the minds of the parties and as such they entered into a compromise. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that application under section 320 (2) CrPC was filed in the trial Court but the same was rejected and the trial Court convicted applicant No. 1 Bhim Bahadur. An appeal was preferred by him before the learned Additional Sessions Judge and in that Court also an application was submitted under section 302 (2) CrPC, however, the same was rejected by the impugned order on the ground that offence under section 498-A IPC is not compoundable. Hence this petition under section 482 CrPC.

(2.) LEARNED counsel for the applicants submits that parties have entered into compromise and certified copy of the application which was filed before the Appellate Court has been filed in this Court as Annexure A-1. Learned counsel further submits that since the offence under section 498-A IPC is not compoundable and therefore in order to streamline the relations between the husband and wife if they are agreed to compromise, the apex Court has shown sufficient light on this point. Learned counsel has invited my attention to the case of B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003 (I) MPWN 145 = (2003) 4 SCC 675 wherein the apex Court in para 13, 14 and 15 has held as under :