Inherent powers of the High Court do not interfere at a premature stage of the proceedings pending before the subordinate court.

1. In the instant petition filed under Section 561-A Cr. P.C. petitioner seeks quashment of order dated 25th August, 2017 passed by the learned Sub-Judge, Special Mobile Magistrate, Poonch.

2. The facts, as are emerged from the study of the file under consideration are that the petitioner-a private driver by profession got married with respondent under the Muslim Law. In this regard, Nikhanama was solemnized with the respondent as per Shariet Law in presence of the witnesses and other respectable citizens on 28th May, 2013 at Ghani, Tehsil Mendhar, District Poonch. The petitioner and the respondent remained as husband and wife only for a period of 5/6 months and thereafter, the respondent left the house of the petitioner with some ornaments and did not return back to the house of the petitioner. After some time, the petitioner approached the respondent for the purpose of bringing her back to his house, but she did not come back and thereafter, some respectable persons of the locality gathered and took a decision that the respondent shall come back to the house of the petitioner, but she did not return to the house of the petitioner. Then again, the petitioner and other family members of both the parties met together and on asking of the aforesaid persons, respondent came back to the house of the petitioner at Banwat, Poonch and remained with her husband (petitioner) for about six months in 2014.

3. It is pleaded in the instant petition that in the year 2015, respondent again left the house of the petitioner without any reason and in the absence of petitioner along with gold ornaments, as he was out of District Poonch with private vehicle. Even, she did not take consent of the parents of the petitioner. One of the neighbours of the petitioner said that she made a statement that one of her relatives had died at Mendhar, as a result whereof, she is leaving the house of the petitioner. Thereafter, she did not return to the house of the petitioner despite the fact that the petitioner and his family members approached the respondent number of time for bringing her back to their house, but all in vain.

4. It is submitted that every time, she asked the petitioner to give her talak in presence of his family members. In this connection, the petitioner was not in a position to give her talak because of the reason that the old aged mother and father of the petitioner had been residing there in the house of the petitioner. Every time, the parents of the petitioner requested to the respondent’s family to return the wife of the petitioner, but they did not take any heed.

5. It is further submitted that the petitioner did his best to return the respondent in the matrimonial house, but she did not come back to his house and after waiting for a long period, the petitioner sent Legal Notices (Annexure-B) through his counsel on 03rd August, 2015 and 04th August, 2015. One of the family members of the respondent is in the police department, who is harassing the petitioner by one way or the other.

6. It is also pleaded in the instant petition that a Resolution for settlement of all the disputes was written by the petitioner and the family members of the respondent and the respondent returned to the house of the petitioner. Thereafter, the petitioner was asked to deposit the amount in the name of the respondent and he cancelled the agreement for deposit of the amount of Rs. 2.00 lacs in favour of the respondent’s account.

7. It has also been pleaded in the instant petition that the petitioner remained in touch with the respondent’s family till 2017, insisting her family members to ask her to come at the residence of the petitioner. The old parents of the petitioner are living with him and his other brothers are living separately. Respondent insisted the petitioner that in case, he leaves his parents, she will come back to his house, otherwise not. The father of the respondent and other witnesses of the petitioner and respondent wrote a Panchayat