Continuing legal proceedings after mutual settlement in a matrimonial dispute constitutes an abuse of the judicial process, warranting quashing of the FIR.

JUDGMENT :

CHANDRA SHEKHAR JHA, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP appearing for State duly assisted by learned counsel for the O.P. No.2.

2. The present application has been filed by the petitioners for quashing the First Information Report (in short ‘F.I.R.’) of Mahila P.S. Case No.4 of 2024 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3 23 , 379, 494, 498-A, 504, 406 read with 34 of INDIAN PENAL CODE (in short ‘I.P.C.’) as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act (in short ‘D.P. Act’).

3. The prosecution case, in brief, as per informant, namely, Rima Kumari @ Rima Devi is that the marriage of informant/O.P. No.2 was solemnized on 23.01.2022 with petitioner No.1. The parents of the informant has given Rs. 14 lakhs in cash, fridge, washing machine, cooler, sofa etc. worth of Rs.2 lakhs and jewellery worth of Rs. 5 lakhs by way of gift and Rs. 1 lakh was also given to the petitioner for chain (sikdi). She further alleged that a demand for four wheeler was also made at the time of vidai by the petitioners. Thereafter, the informant visited her matrimonial house, where everything was fine for few days but, after three days, father of petitioner no.1, namely, Akhilesh Kumar Choudhary told that if the marriage of his son was solemnized somewhere else, he would have been given a four wheeler as dowry. The informant conveyed the demand of petitioner no.1 and other accused person to her parents. Thereafter, the father of informant visited the matrimonial house of informant and expressed his inability to fulfill their demand but, accused persons were not agreed upon and they started harassing the informant in many ways. It is further alleged that petitioner no.1 is Manager at Central Bank and left the informant after beating her and in his absence, other accused persons harassed the informant for dowry. On 10.06.2023, when petitioner no.1 returned, he along with other accused assaulted the informant after snatching her stridhan ousted her from house whereafter petitioner no.1 left her at Siwan Station. It is also alleged that petitioner no.1 has now married with another lady (petitioner no.2) and they are not ready to keep the informant without four wheeler in dowry.

4. On the basis of aforesaid allegation, the informant/O.P. No.2 has filed a complaint case being Cr. Case Complaint (P) No. 2324 of 2023 dated 02.12.2023 before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan. Subsequently, the same was referred to the police for registration of FIR. Consequently, Mahila P.S. Case No.4 (5135029240004) of 2024 registered under Sections 3 23 , 379, 494, 498-A, 504, 406 read with 34 of I.P.C. as well as Sections 3 and 4 of the D.P. Act.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that the matter/disputes settled between the parties, where both parties have decided to dissolve their marriage by way of mutual divorce against one-time settlement qua maintenance for Rs. 12,00,000/ (Rupees Twelve Lakhs only). It is submitted that acting further on said compromise, which is Annexure-P/2 of the present petition, petitioner paid Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) to O.P. No.2/wife through two different demand drafts, which was issued by Central Bank of India, bearing No.148744 for Rs. 5 lakhs and another draft of Rs.5 lakhs also, bearing No. 148745. The remaining amount of Rs. 2 lakh as per compromise be paid to O.P. No.2 by the petitioner no.1 on disposal of divorce petition in terms of compromise. It is submitted that in view of compromise, as submitted above, the continuing with present proceeding before the trial court would only amount to abuse of the process of court.

6. Mr. Deepak Kumar, learned counsel appearin