Sharad Kumar Gupta, J. - By this order I.A. No. 3/2019 application opposing acceptance of petition for compounding / quashing the criminal proceeding pending before the subordinate court is being disposed of.
2. Petitioners have filed the CRMP under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code (in short 'Cr.P.C.') for quashing the criminal proceedings in criminal case No. 9822/2017 pending before the JMFC Durg.
3. Petitioners were facing trial for the offences punishable under Section 498-A,406,323/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
4. Trial Court acquitted petitioners from the charges punishable under Section 406,323 read with Section 34, IPC on the basis of compromise. Now petitioners are facing trial for the offences punishable under Section 498-A of IPC and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.
5. During the pendency of this CRMP counsel for the petitioners submitted that matter has been compromised with complainant who is the respondent no. 3. As per the direction of this Court statements of petitioners and respondent No. 3 have been recorded by Addl. Registrar (Judl.). In her statement respondent No.3 stated that she has compromised matter voluntarily without any fear, pressure or undue influence.
6. On 31-7-2019 when the matter was called for final hearing, counsel for respondent No. 3 filed said application I.A. No.3 along with an affidavit of respondent No. 3. In said application respondent No. 3 had stated that looking to the conduct of petitioners she withdraws her consent and prays that present petition should not be allowed.
7. On 14-8-2019, counsel for respondent No. 3 submitted that he wants to withdraw I.A. No. 3.
8. As per the judicial precedent laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, High Court can quash an FIR or a criminal proceeding of non-compoundable offence on the ground that settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim subject to issued guidelines.
9. As per the judicial precedent laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anil Kumar Jain -v- Maya Jain [2009 (10) SCC 415], in the matter of divorce with mutual consent, any party can withdraw his/her consent before passing of decree.
10. Looking to the aforesaid judicial precedent laid down by hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Anil Kumar Jain (supra), this Court finds that if the matter has been amicably settled between accused and complainant then any party can withdraw his consent regarding amicable settlement before passing order/judgment by the Court. If any party withdraws his or her such consent then same cannot be restored subsequently. In the case in hand, respondent No. 3 has withdrawn her consent regarding amicable settlement by I.A. No. 3, thus withdrawal of such consent cannot be called back by I.A. no. 3. However, she can further give a fresh consent for amicable settlement, which may be considered by this Court.
11. In view of above, the I.A. No. 3/2019 is rejected.
12. List the main CRMP for final hearing after 2 weeks.
Comments