2020 Supreme(Kar) 212

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
B.A. Patil, J.
Vijaya Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State And Others - Respondents
Criminal Petition No.136 of 2020
Decided On : 08-01-2020

Headnote:

Prohibition of Child Marriage Restraint Act - Sections 9 and 11 - Prevention of Corruption Act – Indian Penal Code - Sections 366A and 376 - Criminal Procedure Code – Section 482 - Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 142 - Fraud or misrepresentation - Quashing of criminal proceedings – Acquittal of order - Whether ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment - Whether ends of justice would justify such exercise of power although ultimate consequence may be acquittal or dismissal of indictment - Whether it would be unfair or contrary to interest of justice to continue with criminal proceeding or continuation of criminal proceeding or continuation of criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between victim and wrongdoer - Whether to secure ends of justice it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if answer to above question is in affirmative High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash criminal proceeding - They have filed a joint affidavit of both petitioner-accused and respondent No.2-complainant - In joint affidavit it is submitted that they have amicably settled matter out of Court - Petitioner-accused has agreed to take back respondent No.2 as his wife and they are ready to reunion and live together by dissolving their disputes - Even both parents have agreed to take them back - It is further submitted that as per school records date of birth of respondent No.2 and she has attained age of majority and she is competent to enter into compromise - They have also further submitted that said compromise is without there being any threat force coercion fraud or misrepresentation - Said joint affidavit has been signed by petitioner-accused and respondent No.2- complainant and same has been endorsed by learned counsel appearing for parties - When Court asked a question to both parties they submitted that since earlier they used to like each other and now they intended to jointly live together as husband and wife – Held, Bearing in mind above facts and circumstances and on perusal of charge sheet material though offences leveled against petitioner-accused are punishable under Sections 366A, 376 of IPC r/w Sections 4 and 6 of POCSO Act and Sections 9 and 11 of Prohibition of Child Marriage Restraint Act said offences are non-compoundable in nature - But as could be seen from records parties have compromised matter amicably and respondent-complainant has already attained age of majority and she submits that now they are leading matrimonial life and petitioner-accused has accepted respondent No.2 victim as his wife - When a family is going to be settled it will be a boon to society - Therefore in court opinion if said compromise is allowed by keeping in view above said decision endorsed parties can lead a cordial life hereinafter - Be that as it may - Even if trial is held complainant herself has filed a joint memo for having amicably settled dispute and she will not support case of prosecution and trial held will be nothing but a futile exercise and waste of judicial time - Alleged offences are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life and complainant and accused are intending to join their hands and compound offence and no bodily injury has also been caused to victim - In case of quoted supra it has been observed that High Court is having power under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to weigh material on record and take an appropriate decision in accordance with law - Even subsequently also Honble Apex Court while considering Child Marriage Act has decided same view depending upon facts and circumstances of each case - When parties have entered into amicable settlement and have compromised then under such circumstances court of considered opinion that if compromise is accepted and two families are going to be settled happily said settlement can be accepted - If said settlement is not accepted it is going to create a big gap between them - Their thoughts and ideas may be changed - Respondent No.2 will become destitute and it will be burden to family to settle her life - By time of settlement all problems are going to be resolved - Taking into consideration above said facts and circumstance of case court of considered opinion that it is a fit case to exercise power under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code and permit parties to settle their disputes amicably as entered into - Petition is allowed