IMPORTANT POINT
Though offence u/s. 498A. IPC is not compoundable but in the interest of justice to prevent abuse of process of Court & to secure ends of justice, in the interest of justice proceedings could be quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction of Court.

D.N. Joshi. J. - The Instant criminal miscellaneous petition has been preferred u/s. 482 Cr. P.C. against the order dated 20th June, 2003 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate shim in criminal case No. 4341 2002 "State v. Chiman Singh", whereby the application u/s. 320 Cr. P.C. was rejected on the ground that the offence u/s. 498-A IPC is not compoundable and the case was fixed for recording the evidence on 10-7-2003.

2. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner Mr. Sandeep Saruparia that the matter has been compromised and an application for permission to compound the offence u/s. 498-A IPC was submitted before the trial Court and such application ought to have been accepted and accused should have been acquitted of the charge levelled against him. He has therefore, prayed that the impugned order may be quashed and set aside as it is incorrect illegal and improper.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the petition.

4. Section 498-A IPC is not compoundable in view of the provisions of Section 320 Cr. P.C. and therefore the trial Court was competent to pass the impugned order. But the question is whether it is expedient in the interest of Justice that the proceedings be allowed to continue even the matter has been compromised?

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the decision of this Court in Govinda & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan1 and argued that the Court cannot under inherent powers direct appellate Court to record compromise but in view of the marital offence order to quash proceedings can be made In the Interest of peace between the parties since countenance of proceedings would only amount to abuse of process or the Court.

6. In Saleem & Ors. v. The State of Rajasthan & Ors.2. it has been held that the Court has inherent powers to quash the proceedings, though the offence is not compoundable. Inherent powers can be exercised to prevent the abuse of the process or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Though the offence u/s. 498-A IPC is not compoundable as per Section 320 Cr. P.C., but the Court is competent to quash the proceedings in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction.

7. In Manof Kumar v. State of Rajasthan3 this Court quashed the proceedings u/s. 498-A IPC in view of the compromise between the parties exercising its powers u/s. 482 Cr. P.C. and proceedings of criminal case no. 137/97 u/s. 498-A. IPC pending in the court of A.C.J.M. No. 2. Jodhpur and the order of the learned District Judge, Jodhpur dated 12-6-1998 were quashed.

8. In Jai Kishan v. State of Rajasthan4 the proceedings were quashed by the Court under Section 482 Cr. P.C. in view of the compromise between the parties for the offences u/ss. 498-A and 406 IPC.

9. In Rameshwar v. State of Rajasthan5 permission to compound offence u/s. 498-A IPC was granted by this Court in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction.

10. To the same effect is the judgment in Suresh Chand &. Ors. v. State of Rajasthan6 and, criminal proceedings u/s. 498-A IPC were dropped u/s. 482 Cr. P.C. by this Court.

11. In Ramsharan v. State of Rajasthan7 it was held that no case u/s. 498-A was made out on facts and therefore, proceedings were quashed and petitioner was discharged of the offence u/s. 498-A IPC.

12. In Ramswaroop v. State of Rajasthan8, the wife started living with husband and performing her conjugal duties and with their union a female child was born. The Magistrate rejected compromise entered into between the appellant and wife on ground that the offence u/s. 49B-A is not compoundable. The order of Magistrate was set aside and criminal proceedings pending against husband before the trial Court were quashed by this Court exercising its jurisdiction u/s. 482-Cr. P.C.

13. It was held in Ghanshyam Saini v. State of Rajasthan9, that though the offence u/s. 498-A IPC Is not compoundable, yet it was thought by this Court to be a fit case to allow the compromise and appellate Court was directed to decide the appeal as matter havi