DALVEER SINGH AND ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This joint criminal misc. petition under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the accused -petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and complainant -petitioner No. 4 with the prayer for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 before Additional Metropolitan Magistrate No. 2, Jodhpur Metropolitan (hereinafter referred to as 'the trial court') in Criminal Case No. 150/2013 - State of Rajasthan v/s. Dalveer Singh & Ors. (arising out of FIR No. 35/2013 of Women Police Station, District Jodhpur East), whereby the trial court vide order dated 05.02.2016 has attested the compromise for the offences punishable under Ss. 406 and 323 IPC but refused to attest the compromise for the offence punishable under Sec. 498 -A IPC as the same is not compoundable.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that on a complaint lodged at the instance of petitioner No. 4, the FIR No. 35/2013 was registered at Women Police Station, District Jodhpur East against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3. After investigation, the police filed charge -sheet against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 for offences punishable under Ss. 406, 323 and 498 -A IPC in the trial court wherein the trial is pending against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 for the aforesaid offences. During the pendency of the trial, a joint application was preferred on behalf of the accused -petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and complainant -petitioner No. 4 while stating that the parties have entered into compromise and the petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 4 have decide to live separately and, therefore, the proceedings pending against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 may be terminated. The trial court vide order dated 05.02.2016 has allowed the parties to compound the offences punishable under Ss. 406 and 323 IPC, however, rejected the application so far as it relates to compounding the offence under Sec. 498 -A IPC.

(3.) The present joint criminal misc. petition has been preferred by the accused -petitioner Nos. 1 to 3 and complainant -petitioner No. 4 for quashing the said proceedings against the petitioner Nos. 1 to 3.