Koushalya Rajagopal And Another vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

The present C482 application has been filed by the applicants for quashing the charge sheet dated 02.10.2022 and impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 05.12.2022 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2534 of 2022, State Vs. Koushalya Rajagopal and others, under Section 498-A IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali Kotdwar, District Pauri-Garhwal, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri-Garhwal, against the applicants.

A joint compounding application has been moved on behalf of the parties, supported by their respective affidavits, seeking to compound offences under the aforesaid sections.

It is contended in the compounding application that both – applicants as well as respondent no.2, sat together in order to resolve their dispute and got it resolved. Applicants and respondent no.2 submitted that they don’t have any grievance against each other and want to put acrimony between them to past.

Both – applicant and respondent no.2 are present before this Court, who are duly identified by their respective counsel. On interaction with the parties, they stated that they have amicably settled their dispute and does not want to continue with the present criminal proceedings.

Per contra, learned counsel for the State has formally raised objection to the offence made out in the present case on the ground that the offence is non-compoundable.

So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675 and has held as below: -

“12. The special features in such matrimonial matters are evident. It becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.

There is no doubt that the object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 498-A in the Penal Code, 1860 was to prevent torture to a woman by her husband or by relatives of her husband. Section 498-A was added with a view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowry. The hypertechnical view would be counterproductive and would act against interests of women and against the object for which this provision was added. There is every likelihood that non-exercise of inherent power to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XX-A of the Penal Code, 1860.

In view of the above discussion, we hold that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint and Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.”

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the opinion that since the parties have reached to the terms of the compromise, there would remain a remote or bleak possibility of conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to permit continuation of the criminal proceedings. Since the answer to the aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

Accordingly, Compounding Application (IA No.2 of 2025) is allowed. The offences between the parties are permitted to be compounded. As a result, the impugned charge sheet dated 02.10.2022 and impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 05.12.2022 and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.2534 of 2022, State Vs. Koushalya Rajagopal and others, under Section 498-A IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali Kotdwar, District Pauri-Garhwal, pending before learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kotdwar, District Pauri-Garhwal, against the applicants stand quashed.

C482 application stands disposed-off, in the aforesaid terms.