1 2025:CGHC:56499-DB NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 3525 of 2025 1. Ashutosh Pandey @ Ashu S/o Mithlesh Pandey Aged About 31 Years Sundar Nagar House No. 266, Behind Beda Public School, Raipur, Thana, D.D. Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Krishna Pandey W/o Mithilesh Kumar Pandey Aged About 58 Years Sundar Nagar House No. 266, Behind Beda Public School, Raipur, Thana, D.D. Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. 3. Mithilesh Kumar Pandey S/o Late Keshav Prasad Pandey Aged About 59 Years Sundar Nagar House No. 266, Behind Beda Public School, Raipur, Thana, D.D. Nagar, Distt. Raipur, Chhattisgarh. ... Petitioner(s) versus 1. State Of Chhattisgarh Through Ps Mahila Thana, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. 2. Smt. Neha @ Pooja Pandey W/o Ashutosh Pandey Aged About 32 Years D/o Bharat Lal Pandey, At Green Park Colony, 9/92, Rented Premises Of Pravesh Soni, Near Maharana Pratap Chowk, Ps Civil Line, Distt. Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondent(s) (Cause title taken from CIS) For Petitioners : Mr. Vijay Nagdev, Advocate through V.C. For Respondent/ State : Mr. Malay Jain, P.L. For Respondent No. 2 Mr. Prakhar Dutt, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha, Chief Justice JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.11.21 10:27:01 +0530 2 Hon'ble Shri Bibhu Datta Guru, Judge Order on Board Per Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice 20.11.2025 1. Heard Mr.Vijay Nagdev, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. Malay Jain, learned Panel Lawyer for the respondents/ State and Mr. Prakhar Dutt, Advocate for respondent No. 2. 2. The present petition has been filed by the petitioners with the following prayer :- “It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash Chargesheet bearing Number 23/2023 dated 13/03/2023, FIR No. 61/2022 dated 05/11/2022 registered by PS Mahila Thana District Bilaspür (C.G.) for offences u/s 498A, 34 of IPC, Order taking cognizance dated 18.04.2023 and the Criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Ld. JMFC, Bilaspur, C.G., in Criminal case no. 2961/2023, titled as "State of CG Vs Ashutosh Pandey & Ors" in the interest of justice.” 3. Facts of the case in nutshell is that the respondent No. 2 is the legally wedded wife of petitioner no. 1 and their marriage was solemnized in June 2014, thereafter according to her complaint she was harassed for demand of dowry and an FIR bearing crime No. 61/2022, u/s 498A, 34 IPC was registered against the petitioners. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the parties have 3 amicably resolved their long-standing matrimonial dispute. He further submits that, though the investigation concluded and the impugned charge sheet was filed before the trial court, during the pendency of the trial the parties arrived at a settlement. In pursuance thereof, the private respondent herself moved an application under Section 359 of the BNSS, upon which the trial court duly recorded her compromise statement. However, despite the dispute being matrimonial in nature, the trial court rejected the said application on the ground that the offences in question were not compoundable as per the schedule appended to Section 359 of the BNSS. 5. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 also supports the submissions advanced and submits that an amicable compromise has indeed been arrived at between the parties. 6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents on record. 7. Having considered the submissions made on behalf of the parties and upon perusal of the record, it is evident that the dispute between the parties arises out of a matrimonial discord, which has now been amicably settled. Respondent No. 2, being the complainant, has voluntarily entered into a compromise and has no objection to the quashing of the criminal proceedings. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has categorically held that in offences arising out of matrimonial disputes or family discord, which are predominantly 4 personal in nature, the High Court may exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice, even where the offences are technically non-compoundable. In view of the amicable settlement between the parties, the voluntary compromise recorded before the trial court, and the fact that no fruitful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings, we find this to be a fit case to exercise inherent jurisdiction. Accordingly, the present Criminal Miscellaneous Petition deserves to be allowed. The FIR bearing Crime No. 61/2022 registered at Police Station Mahila Thana, Bilaspur C.G. offence under section 498A, 34 of IPC and the consequential charge-sheet and all further criminal proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed. Sd/- Sd/- (Bibhu Datta Guru) (Ramesh Sinha) Judge Chief Justice Jyoti