M.G. Giratkar JUDGMENT
M.G. Giratkar, J.
1. The criminal application is admitted and heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By the present application, the applicant Nos. 1, 2 and 3 prayed to quash and set aside first information report lodged by the applicant No. 1 against applicant Nos. 2 and 3. It is submitted that applicant No. 1 married with applicant No. 2 on 25-3-2014. After discharging matrimonial obligation, applicant Nos. 1 and 2 did not adjust with each other and therefore, quarrel took place between them. The applicant No. 1 lodged the report in the Police Station on 24-4-2014 alleging cruelty by applicant Nos. 2 and 3 and demand of dowry of Rs. 1,00,000/-. On the report of applicant No. 1, Crime No. 77/2014 for the offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act came to be registered.
3. Applicant No. 1 filed proceedings before the Family Court, Nagpur. During the pendency of the proceedings before the Family Court, matter was referred for mediation/conciliation. The applicant Nos. 1 and 2 settled their dispute before the Mediator as per the terms stated in the agreement.
4. It is submitted that the applicant No. 1 - wife and applicant No. 2 - husband have settled their all disputes pending between them. It is submitted that in view of the compromise, applicant No. 1 do not want to prosecute applicant Nos. 2 and 3 for the offences punishable under Section 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act registered by Police Station, Wadi, Nagpur vide Crime No. 77/2014. It is submitted that after investigation of the crime, charge-sheet came to be filed in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 2, Nagpur which is registered as Regular Criminal Case No. 2517/2014. At last it is prayed to quash and set aside Regular Criminal Case No. 2517/2014 arising out of Crime No. 77/2014 (Police Station, Wadi) pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 2, Nagpur.
5. Today, applicant No. 1 (wife of applicant No. 2) is present with her counsel Shri Giripunje. Learned counsel Shri Giripunje has submitted that the matter is settled before the Family Court as per the agreement, Annexure-B, therefore, in view of the compromise, the applicant No. 1 do not want to prosecute applicant Nos. 2 and 3 and therefore, prayed to allow the application in terms of prayer clause (1).
6. Heard learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Khan for the non-applicant. She has opposed the application. She has submitted that offences are not compoundable and therefore, application is liable to be rejected.
7. We have heard the applicant No. 1 - wife of applicant No. 2 in person. She has stated before us that they have settled their dispute before the Family Court as per the terms of agreement, Annexure-B. She has stated before us that she do not want to prosecute the applicant Nos. 2 and 3. The applicant No. 1 has stated that due to misunderstanding, she lodged the report against the applicant Nos. 2 and 3, therefore, prayed to allow the application.
8. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the recent judgment in Criminal A........