The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC in a family dispute involving matrimony, where the complainant settled the dispute amicably without coercion.
Criminal proceeding in G.R Case No.1063 of 1994 arising out of Govindpur P.S Case No.128 of 1994 pending in J.M.F.C.(R), Cuttack, quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRLMC NO.4220 OF 2015
08.10.2015 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and
learned Addl. Government Advocate.
2. This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed by the petitioner with a pray
er to quash the proceeding in G.R Case No.1063 of 1994 arising out of Govindpur P.S Case No.12
8 of 1994 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C. (R), Cuttack.
3. An affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2-informant on 04.10.2015 stating the
rein that due to intervention of well wishers the dispute between the parties has been settled
amicably without any coercion and influence from any quarter. He does not want to proceed wit
h the case, therefore, the proceeding may be quashed.
4. The power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or F.I.R or complaint in
exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a cri
minal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of
wide plentitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the gui
delines engrafted in such power i.e. (i) to secure the ends of justice or, (ii) to prevent
abuse of the process of court. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences l
ike murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victims
family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and
have a serious impact on society. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominat
ingly civil flavor stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularl
y 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 wro
ng is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispu
te. In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its vi
ew, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of convicti
on is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great op
pression. In other words the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary t
o the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the crim
inal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law. It is appropriate that the crim
inal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above questions is in the affirmative, the
High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.
5. The informant is not interested to prosecute the case any further as stated above. Thi
s Court therefore, feels that no fruitful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal pro
ceeding to continue as there is bleak chance of success. Hence to secure interest of justice a
nd to prevent abuse of the process of court the proceeding need be quashed.
6. In view of the above, this Court quashes the proceeding in G.R Case No.1063 of 1994 ar
ising out of Govindpur P.S Case No.128 of 1994 pending in the court of learned J.M.F.C. (R), C
uttack.
The CRLMC along with Misc. Case is accordingly disposed of.
..
S.Panda, J.
3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings in a family dispute arising from matrimony can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC due to a settlement and settlement.
Whether the complaint has a primarily civil flavor and continuation of the case would amount to an abuse of process of law.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Nimma Venkatesh v. State of KarnatakaReferred¶5
Nimma Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka, (2013) 1 SCC 515 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Opposite party no.2-informant
S.Panda
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court