[2025:RJ-JD:49468]

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 9607/2025

1. Farooque Mohammed S/o Mohammed Deen, Aged About

46 Years, Resident Of Near Jalalshah Peer Dargah, Adarsh Colony, Behind Pbm Hospital, Bikaner.

2. Hasina W/o Mohammed Deen, Aged About 66 Years, Resident Of Near Jalalshah Peer Dargah, Adarsh Colony, Behind Pbm Hospital, Bikaner.

----Petitioners Versus

1. State Of Rajasthan, Through Public Prosecutor.

2. Shahnej Bano D/o Aamin Ali, Resident Of Near Railway Masjid, Rampura Basti, Lalgarh, Bikaner.

----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Aziz Khan Mr. Sonu Singh Rathore For Respondent(s) : Mr. Hanuman Prajapati, P.P.

Mr. Aslam Khan for R-2 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YOGENDRA KUMAR PUROHIT

Order

17/11/2025

1. This criminal misc. petition under Section 528 BNSS/482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the petitioners for quashing the criminal proceedings for the offence punishable under Section 498A IPC on the basis of compromise by setting aside the judgment and order dated 06.10.2021 passed by the Judicial Magistrate No.3, Bikaner ("the trial court") in Criminal Case No. 29/2004 "State Vs. Farooque Mohd & Ors." convicting the sentencing the petitioner for the offence u/s 498A IPC and while disposing the criminal proceedings pending before learned Additional Sessions Judge (Women Atrocities Cases), Bikaner in Cr. Appeal No.161/2021 preferred by the petitioners against the judgment and order of the trial court, wherein the appellate court vide order dated 09.09.2025 has refused to attest the compromise filed by the parties on the ground that the offence punishable u/s

498A IPC is not compoundable.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that vide judgment and order dated 6.10.2021 passed in Criminal Case No. 29/2004 arising out of FIR No.45/2004, Police Station Mahila, Bikaner filed by the respondent-wife, the trial court convicted the petitioners for the offence u/s 498A IPC and sentenced to one year simple imprisonment with Rs. 1000/- as fine. Against the said judgment and order passed by the trial court, the petitioners preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.161/2021 "Farooque Mohd. & Anr. Vs. State" wherein sentence has been suspended by the appellate court and the petitioners are on bail. During pendency of the said appeal, the parties settled the dispute amicably and filed compromise application u/s 489A IPC. It has been stated by the complainant-respondent that in the spirit of Lok Adalat, she has entered into compromise with the petitioners and she does not want the criminal proceedings against the petitioners and therefore, the compromise may be attested. But the appellate court has refused to attest the compromise vide order dated 09.09.2025 on the ground that the offence punishable u/s 498A IPC is not compoundable.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that it is a matrimonial dispute between husband and wife and as the petitioners and the complainant-respondent No.2 wife have already entered into compromise and therefore, the accused- petitioners deserve to be acquitted of the offence u/s 498A IPC by compounding the said offence, else the same may derail the compromise arrived at between the parties. Accordingly, learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners arising out of the aforesaid FIR including quashing the judgment and order passed by the trial court and acquitting them of the offence u/s 498A IPC while disposing of the appeal filed by them.

4. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2 has also admitted that the parties have already entered into compromise and the respondent No.2-wife does not want to press the charges levelled against the petitioners in relation to offence under Section 498A I.P.C. It is submitted that the complainant-respondent No.2 has no objection if the criminal proceedings against the petitioners are quashed by acquitting them of the offence u/s 498A IPC.

5. Learned pub