SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(SC) 247

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
P. SATHASIVAM, JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.
Jitendra Raghuvanshi & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Babita Raghuvanshi & Anr. – Respondents
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 447 OF 2013
(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 6462 of 2012)
Decided On : 15-03-2013

Proceedings u/s 498A/406 IPC - amicable settlement - quashing - section 320 Cr.P.C. not an impediment.

Headnote:(a) Code of Criminal procedure, 1973 - Section 320 - Proceeding u/ss 498A and 406 IPC - Petition for quashing - Rejected on the ground of bar u/s 320 against compounding - Petition was for quashing in view of amicable settlement and not compounding - Petition ought not to have been rejected. (Para 10)

        (b) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Criminal proceedings u/ss 406 and 498A IPC - Quashing - Matrimonial dispute - Settled amicably and without any pressure - High Court competent to quash FIR, complaint or subsequent proceedings notwithstanding bar on compounding u/s 320, Cr.P.C. (Paras 12 and 14)

        (2003) 4 SCC 675; 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; (1977) 4 SCC 551; (1999) 5 SCC 238; (1998) 5 SCC 749 - Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

        The ambit and scope of the inherent powers of the High Courts under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in quashing of the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable offences relating to matrimonial disputes is called in question in this case.

        The specific question is whether the High Court has power to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of offences under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC since both are non-compoundable?

       Finding of the Court:

        High Court ought to have quashed the proceedings.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

P.Sathasivam,J.

1) Leave granted.

2) The important question that falls for determination in the instant appeal is about the ambit and scope of the inherent powers of the High Courts under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short “the Code”) in quashing of the criminal proceedings in non-compoundable offences relating to matrimonial disputes.

3) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 04.07.2012 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in M.CR.C. No. 2877 of 2012, whereby the High Court dismissed the petition filed by the appellants herein under Section 482 of the Code for quashing of proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4166 of 2011 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate Class I, Indore.

4) Brief facts:

a) The marriage of Jitendra Raghuvanshi (Appellant No. 1 herein) and Babita Raghuvanshi, respondent-wife, was solemnized on 22.02.2002 as per Hindu rites and rituals. After the marriage, the parties were residing together as husband and wife at District Baitul, M.P. On 05.03.2003, an FIR being No. 172 of 2003 was registered at P.S. Sarni, Dist. Baitul for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short ‘the IPC’) at the instance of Babita Raghuvanshi – respondent-wife owing to the harassment and torture meted out to her in the matrimonial home by her husband and his relatives. A Criminal Case being No. 4166 of 2011 was also registered against the appellants herein for the offences punishable under Sections 498A and 406 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

b) During the pendency of the criminal proceedings, in the year 2012, with the help and intervention of family members, friends and well-wishers, the parties amicably settled their differences by way of mutual settlement. Pursuant to the same, on 03.04.2012, a compromise/settlement application was filed for dropping of the criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No. 4166 of 2011 and FIR No. 172 of 2003 dated 05.03.2003 before the trial Court. Respondent-wife also filed an affidavit stating that she did not wish to pursue the criminal proceedings against the appellants. However, by order dated 03.04.2012, learned trial Judge rejected the said application.

c) Being aggrieved by the order dated 03.04.2012, on 09.04.2012, the appellants herein filed an application being M.CR.C. No. 2877 of 2012 before the High Court invoking its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings launched against them. The High Court, by impugned order dated 04.07.2012, dismissed the application filed by the appellants herein stating that the court has no power to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of offences under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC since both are non-compoundable.

d) Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants have filed the present appeal by way of special leave.

5) Heard Ms. Preetika Dwivedi, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. S.K. Dubey, learned senior counsel for Respondent No. 2 and Mr. Rahul, learned counsel for Respondent No.1.

6) The scope and ambit of power under Section 482 of the Code has been examined by this Court in a catena of earlier decisions. In the present case, we are concerned about interference by the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 in relation to matrimonial disputes.

7) It is not in dispute that matrimonial disputes have been on considerable increase in recent times resulting in filing of complaints under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC not only against the husband but also against the relatives of the husband. The question is when such matters are resolved either by the wife agreeing to rejoin the matrimonial home or by mutual settlement of other pending disputes for which both the sides approached the High Court and jointly prayed for quashing of the criminal proceedings or the FIR or complaint by the wife under Sections 498A and 406 of IPC, wh












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top