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 out of 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 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 the affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to
quash the criminal proceeding.”
