All these three criminal miscellaneous petitions, though involve different facts and arises out of different first information reports, but substantially raise a common question of law. They have been therefore clubbed together for the purpose of decision and are being decided by this common judgment.

2. In all these three petitions, the petitioners are either husband or his relatives, who have been made accused in the first information reports for offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC lodged at the instance of complainant-respondent-wife. The respondents-wives in all these three petitions, have compromised the matters and filed the compromise deed before the court concerned and also obtained decree of divorce by mutual consent where they agreed to get the proceedings in criminal cases lodged at their instances dropped/quashed in terms of the compromise deed. But they have later on changed their mind and decided to pursue such criminal matters. It is precisely for this reason that all these petitions have been filed on behalf of accused-petitioners for quashment of the proceedings in respective criminal cases. It is matter of coincidence that all these matters happened to be listed today. Though they were heard separately but are now being decided by this common judgment.

3. Before proceeding to deal with the matters on merits, I deem it appropriate to briefly narrate the facts of each case in the sequence they are mentioned herein above.

Petition No.4737/2014

4. This petition has been filed by accused- petitioner-husband for quashment of proceedings in Criminal Case No.5958/2012 pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.14, Jaipur Metropolitan, Jaipur, arising out of F.I.R. No.127/2011, Police Station Mahila Thana, Jaipur City (East), for offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Petitioner and non-petitioner no.2 married each other on 15.02.2009. But due to strained relations between them, the non-petitioner no.2 filed a criminal complaint in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate No.14, Jaipur Metropolitan, who forwarded the same to the police station under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for investigation. On that basis, an F.I.R. No.127/2011 was registered for offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC. After investigation, police filed challan on 30.09.2011 against petitioners in the said court for offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC. Learned trial court framed charges against the petitioner for those offences.

6. During pendency of the criminal case, the parties arrived at compromise to withdraw the criminal case and get a decree of divorce by mutual consent. They jointly submitted a petition under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court No.1. The Family Court accordingly passed decree of divorce by mutual consent on 29.06.2013. It was clearly agreed upon between the parties that due to strained relations they had been living separately since 01.05.2011 and in 2013 they got decree of divorce under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act and accordingly they got criminal case withdrawn/decided in terms of the compromise. Grievance of the accused-petitioner is that the respondent-wife is not cooperating in getting the criminal cases initiated at her instance withdrawn in terms of the compromise.

7. Mr. Dhoop Singh Poonia, learned counsel for accused-petitioner, submitted that despite having obtained decree of divorce by mutual consent on the basis of compromise entered between the parties, the respondent-wife now cannot be permitted to continue with the prosecution of the petitioner. She undertook before the Family Court that she would withdraw the prosecution of the petitioner for offence under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC as also the proceedings under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 pending in the court and also cooperate the petitioner husband in withdrawing the proceedings in the criminal case. The prosecution