K.C. Sharma, J.-Heard Counsel for the parties and p rused the impugned order.

2. The marriage of petitioner No. 1 was solem ized with non-petitioner No. 2 on 02.03.2002.

After few months of their marriage, the non-petition r wife lodged a report against petiti er husban

and his parents at Mahila Thana (North) Jaipur, upo which the police after investigati submitte

charge-sheet and the trial Court framed charges for offence under Sections 323 and 498-A, IPC

against the petitioners.

3. It is stated that during pendency of trial, the parties amicably settled all heir disputes and the

husband and wife have decided to live separately. To set at rest all the disputes, husband and w

filed a petition for divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court

Court diThe petitioners and non-petitioner No 2 also filed joint applicatiofAnnexure-1 before the trial

Jaipur praying therein that since parties have amicably settled their disputes and t complainant w

does not want to further prosecute the matter the offence maydbe ordered to be compounded and he

4. The petitioners have invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482, CrPC. for

permitting to compound