DHARMPAL AND ANR. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application under S. 438 Crimial P.C. in FIR No. 36/ 37 registered at police station Khetri Nagar, District Jhunjhunu for offence under S. 498A IPC.

(2.) Smt. Savitri had filed a report in the aforesaid police station on 25-5-87 levelling certain charges against the petitioner and his parents. The petitioner apprehending the arrest moved an application for anticipatory bail before Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu which was rejected vide order dated 11-6-87. Thereafter this an application was filed in this court. When the application came before me on 7-7-87. I found that this was a case of a girl of extremely young age and there could be chances of reprochment, as on hearing the arguments learned counsel or the petitioner I felt that there may be some exaggerations. 1, therefore, thought it proper to appoint an amicus curaie to represent the complainant and directed the amicus curaie to seek instructions personally from the complainant Sint. Savitri and if possible to keep her present in the court. I also thought it proper to issue directions to the police not to arrest the accused pending this application. Thereafter Shri K.C. Sharma who was appointed as amiscus curaie presented Smt. Savitri before the court and the accused petitioner, Dharampal also appeared. According to me since basically it was a case of disharmony between husband and the wife of extremely young age, I thought it proper to exploit the chances of reconciliation, hence the parents of both the parties were also called and by that time Miss Sunita Satyarthi also appeared for the complainant Snit. Savitri. Smt. Premlata Indoliya, a social worker from Khetri Nagar, also came alongwith Smt. Savitri and her parents. After hearing all concerns, I found that there had been many misunderstandings between the two on account of reasons which for the sake of future benefit of both the parties, I would not like to mention here. I talked individually to both Smt. Savitri and Dharampal and found that both of them had soft corner for each other and they expressed their desire to stay together for few days to remove misunderstandings, if any. With the persuasion of learned counsel for all the parties and the aforesaid social worker I found that there was substance in what the husband and wife stated and I granted them two weeks' time and extended the operation of the order. Both of them have appeared to day before me and have stated that they lived happily since 2nd Sept. 1987 till date and have resolved all previous disputes and intended to live happily in future. They were made to understand the implications and complications of the present litigation but despite that they intend to have peaceful and happy matrimonial home. I, therefore, recorded their statements on oath which are being place on record.

(3.) In view of the aforesaid statements they have made I confirmed the interlocutory order and direct that in the event of the arrest the petitioner shall not be arrested in FIR No. 36/87 of police station Khetri Nagar, District Jhunjhunu provided he executes a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 1000.00 to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. I would like to observe that since the matter is at the investigation stage it would be improper for me to quash investigation in an application under S. 438 Cr. PC but would be failing in my duty if I do not observe that all laws are made to serve the humanity and bring peace to the people and particularly in cases which are matrimonial in nature if the parties seek re-conciliation, It behoves all concerned including the State, police and the courts to help them in rehabilitating and not to put impediments in their way. This would advance the cause for which marriages are performed. I would, therefore, express the desire that such cases must be given decent burial in the spirit in which the parties have buried their past differences. In case despite the aforesaid compromise there is a charge sheet against the petitioner, it would be open for petitioner to approach this court in an application under S. 432 Cr PC but I am sure such an opportunity would not arise in a welfare State like of ours. Copy of this order may be sent to Shri M.M. Mehrish, DIG Vigilance (Dowry Cases), Jaipur.