ANUJ SHARMA Vs. STATE OF HP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioners-accused, for quashing of the FIR No.97 dated 9.7.2014, under Sections 498-A, 323, 406 and 506 read with Section 34 of IPC, registered with Police Station Gagret, District Una, H.P. as well as consequent proceedings pending before the court below on the basis of amicable settlement arrived inter-se parties.

(2.) Briefly stated facts as emerge from the record are that FIR referred herein above came to be lodged against the petitioners at the behest of respondent No.2-complainant Smt. Bhanu Priya, who alleged that she is being maltreated and mentally harassed by the petitioners on account of dowry. After completion of investigation, police presented challan in the competent court of law, which is pending adjudication. However, during pendency of the case before the court below, parties resolved to settle their dispute amicably inter-se them and as per agreed terms filed petition under Section 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the court of learned Additional District Judge (I), Una, Circuit Court at Amb, District Una, H.P., seeking therein dissolution of marriage by way of mutual consent. Careful perusal of judgment dated 17.7.2018, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, (Annexure P-3) reveals that learned Court below on the basis of joint statements having been made by petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 passed decree of divorce, declaring marriage inter-se petitioner No.1 and respondent No.2 dissolved with effect from decree passed under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. After passing of aforesaid decree, petitioners have approached this Court in the instant proceedings, seeking therein quashment of FIR as well as consequent proceedings initiated at the behest of respondent No.2.

(3.) On 18.7.2019, this Court having carefully perused material placed on record deemed it fit to summon respondent No.2 in the Court so that correctness and genuineness of compromise arrived inter-se parties is ascertained. This Court also directed the learned Additional Advocate General to get the information from the police station concerned.