1. Prosecution for offences under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, and 506 of the IPC — Settlement reached between husband and wife — Petition for quashing of proceedings. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1615
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
Jasmair Singh & Anr. – Appellants
Versus
State of Haryana & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1444 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5724 of 2022)
Decided On : 05-09-2022
Important Points
The court can exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement between the parties, in line with the law declared by the Supreme Court.
Subject
Criminal Law - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
Settlement - Criminal Procedure - The court allowed the appeal and quashed the criminal proceedings based on a settlement between the parties, in accordance with the law declared by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant husband sought quashing of criminal proceedings against him based on a settlement with the respondent wife.
Finding of the Court:
The court allowed the appeal, considering the settlement between the parties and quashed the criminal proceedings.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The settlement between the parties and the law declared by the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab influenced the court's decision to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the settlement was taken on record, and the criminal proceedings were quashed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates appeared:
Mr. Sunil Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, M/s. Mukesh Kumar Singh And Co., Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Alok Sangwan, AAG, Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Anurag Kulharia, Advocate, Mr. Apoorv Yadav, Advocate, Mr. Vipul Dahiya, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep, Advocate, Dr. Monika Gusain, Advocate, Mr. Shahbaz Ahmadnaik, Advocate, Mr. Vishal Arun Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Hitesh Shahi, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Harshita Nigam, Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Parshuram Paswan, Advocate, Mr. Ujjwal Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Mr. Sunil Choudhary, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Mukesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, M/s. Mukesh Kumar Singh And Co., Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Alok Sangwan, AAG, Mr. Sumit Kumar Sharma, Advocate, Mr. Anurag Kulharia, Advocate, Mr. Apoorv Yadav, Advocate, Mr. Vipul Dahiya, Advocate, Mr. Sandeep, Advocate, Dr. Monika Gusain, Advocate, Mr. Shahbaz Ahmadnaik, Advocate, Mr. Vishal Arun Mishra, Advocate, Mr. Hitesh Shahi, Advocate, Mr. Pawan Kumar, Advocate, Ms. Harshita Nigam, Advocate, Mr. Dinesh Kumar, Advocate, Mr. Parshuram Paswan, Advocate, Mr. Ujjwal Bhardwaj, Advocate, Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, Advocate, For the Respondent.
Table of Contents
2. Appellant sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. based on a compromise entered into between the parties. (Para 5 )
3. The court noted the undisputed settlement between the parties and found the matter suitable for the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. (Para 6 , 7 )
4. Criminal proceedings may be quashed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. where parties have settled their disputes, following the law declared in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab. (Para 7 )
5. Appeal allowed — Settlement taken on record — Proceedings under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, and 506 of the IPC quashed. (Para 8 )
6. Can criminal proceedings be quashed if the parties have reached a settlement?
Yes, where parties have settled their disputes and decided to end the proceedings, the court may exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings. (Para 7 )
7. What legal precedent guides the quashing of proceedings based on a compromise?
The court follows the law declared in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab to determine if a case is suitable for the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. (Para 7 )
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 07.04.2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CRM-M No. 974 of 2022.
3. The appellant husband is facing prosecution in crime registered pursuant to First Information Report No. 55 dated 14.02.2016 lodged with Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC" for short).
4. A Memo of Compromise dated 23.12.2021 was entered into between the appellant husband and respondent no. 2-wife in respect of all the pending litigations between the parties.
5. In accordance with said compromise, the appellant filed CRM-M No. 974 of 2022 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, ("Cr.P.C." for short) praying for quashing of the crime registered pursuant to First Information Report No. 55 of 2016. The request having been turned down, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellant-husband.
6. It is not disputed that a settlement was arrived at between the appellant-husband and the respondent no. 2-wife.
7. Since the parties have buried the hatchet and have decided to give quietus to the proceedings which were lodged inter se, going by the law declared by this Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, the case was eminently suitable to be considered for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code.
8. We, therefore, allow this appeal, take the settlement on record and quash the proceedings registered pursuant to First Information Report No. 55 dated 14.02.2016 lodged with Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 of the IPC.
