Irfan & others vs State Of Uttarakhand & Others

Ravindra Maithani, J

The instant petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') has been filed for quashing and setting aside the charge sheet dated 14.09.2013 and summoning order dated 06.01.2015 along with the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.35 of 2015, State vs. Irfan and others, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 of I.P.C. & 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Gadarpur, District Udham Singh Nagar, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (S.D)/Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar in terms of compromise between the parties.

In this case, FIR was lodged by respondent no.2 against the petitioners under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act. After investigation charge sheet was submitted against all the petitioners.

Today, it is informed that parties have amicably settled the dispute.

A joint compounding application has also been filed by the parties, which is supported by the affidavits of the petitioner no.1 and respondent no.2. The petitioner no.1 Irfan, petitioner no.2 Smt. Parveen, petitioner no.3 Mehmood and petitioner no.4 Sayreen @ Rani are present in person before this Court, duly identified by their counsel Mr. Mani Kumar and respondent no.2 Shabina Parveen is also present in person before this Court, duly identified by her counsel Mr. Saurav Adhikari. They both state before the Court that they have amicably settled the dispute.

Learned counsel for the petitioners and respondent no.2 both would argue that the dispute between the parties has amicably been settled. Now, continuance of any criminal proceedings would definitely be non productive and would not yield any result to meet ends of justice. Hence, the proceedings may be quashed.

In the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, Hon'ble Court, interalia, held as under:

The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: 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 F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed........................................................

Parties have already settled their dispute amicably. In fact, if the trial proceeds now, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak. It would not secure the ends of justice. In fact, interest of justice demands that the criminal case is put to an end. Therefore, this Court is of the view that since parties have amicably settled their dispute, the criminal proceedings deserve to be quashed and the petition deserves to be allowed.

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed. The charge sheet dated 14.09.2013 and summoning order dated 06.01.2015 alongwith the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.35 of 2015, State vs Irfan and other under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 of I.P.C. and 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Gadarpur District Udham Singh Nagar pending before the court of learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed.

Compounding Application No.847 of 2019 stands disposed of accordingly.