Dinesh Parasrampuria vs State Of Jharkhand

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J

Heard the parties.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction  of this  Court  under  Section  528  of  the  B.N.S.S.,  2023  with the prayer  to  quash  the  entire  criminal  proceeding  including  the  order  dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 18796 of 2024 whereby and where under  the  learned  Chief  Judicial  Magistrate,  Ranchi  has  taken  cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 498A/34, 341/34, 323/34, 504/34, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and the said case is now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2-complainant jointly draw attention of this Court to I.A. No. 329 of 2026 which is supported by the separate affidavits of all the petitioners as well as the opposite party No.2-complainant and submit that therein, it has categorically been mentioned that the parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the court by way of a compromise upon mediation by the mediator of Mediation Center, Ranchi. In view of the compromise, the opposite party No.2- complainant is not interested to proceed  with  the  case  against the  petitioners. It  is  next  submitted  that  the genesis of the occurrence is a marital dispute between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2-complainant further submit that the dispute between  the  parties is a private dispute and no public policy is involved in this case. It is next submitted that in view of the settlement between the parties, the continuation  of this criminal  proceeding  will  amount  to  abuse  of  process of law, as in view of the compromise, the chance of conviction of the petitioners is remote and bleak. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 18796 of 2024 now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi,be quashed and set aside.

Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State submits that in view of the compromise between the parties, the State has no objection for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 18796 of 2024 now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others vs. State of Gujarat & Another reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, had the occasion to consider the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure inter alia on the basis of compromise between the parties and has held in paragraph No.11 as under:-

“11. Section 482 is prefaced with an overriding provision. The statute saves the inherent power of the High Court, as a superior court, to make such orders as are necessary (i) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; or (ii) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In Gian Singh [Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 : (2012)  4  SCC  (Civ) 1188  :  (2013)  1  SCC  (Cri)  160  :  (2012)  2  SCC (L&S) 988] a Bench  of  three learned  Judges of  this Court adverted  to the body of precedent on the subject and laid down guiding principles which the High Court should consider in determining as to whether to quash an FIR or complaint in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction. The considerations which must weigh with the High Court are : (SCC pp. 342-43, para 61)

“61.…the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal  court  for  compounding  the  offences  under  Section  320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised  in accord with the guideline  engrafted in such power viz. :  (i) to secure  the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR  may  be  exercised where  the offender  and  the  victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, etc.; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising outof matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases,  the  High  Court  may  quash  the  criminal  proceedings  if  in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and  prejudice and  extreme injustice would  be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would  tantamount  to  abuse  of  process  of  law  despite  settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”(Emphasis supplied)”

Perusal  of  the  record  reveals  that  the  offences  involved  in  this  case are not heinous offences nor is there any serious offence of mental depravity  involved  in  this  case  rather  the  same  relates to  private  dispute between the parties relating to marital dispute and no public policy is involved in this case.

Because of the complete settlement between the offender and the victim,  the  possibility  of  conviction  of  the  petitioners  is  remote  and  bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the petitioners to great oppression  and  prejudice  and  extreme  injustice  would  be  caused  to  them by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.

Hence, this Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case where the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint  Case  No.  18796  of  2024  now  pending  before  the  learned  Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, be quashed and set aside.

Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 07.08.2025 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi in connection with Complaint Case No. 18796 of 2024 now pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi, is quashed and set aside.

In the result, this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition is allowed.

In view of disposal of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition, I.A. No. 329 of 2026 is disposed of accordingly.