IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT GOA
Manish Pitale, J.
Sanjay Jain & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
State Of Goa & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 22, 23 and 30 of 2022 (F)
Decided On : 14-01-2022
Consent Terms - Quashing of Criminal Cases - The court allowed the writ petitions for quashing criminal cases based on the consent terms between the parties, which agreed to the quashing of the criminal proceedings pending between them.
Fact of the Case:
The parties were husband and wife, now divorced, with criminal cases filed against each other during the period of matrimonial acrimony. They reached an amicable settlement and agreed to specific terms, including the quashing of the criminal proceedings.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the parties, having settled their dispute and not wishing to proceed with the criminal cases as per the consent agreement, deserved to have their writ petitions allowed in the interest of justice.
Issues: The main issue was whether the criminal cases, arising from the matrimonial dispute, should be quashed based on the consent terms between the parties.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the consent terms executed between the parties, which specifically agreed to the quashing of the criminal proceedings, and the fact that the parties had settled their dispute.
Final Decision: The court allowed all the writ petitions and quashed the criminal cases against the parties.
JUDGMENT
Manish Pitale, J. - There are three Writ Petitions for consideration before this Court. Two Writ Petitions filed by Sanjay Jain and the third petition is filed by Anju Jain. Parties were husband and wife and now they are divorced. During the period of matrimonial acrimony between the parties, there were criminal cases filed against each other resulting in registration of First Information Reports (FIRs). After a long drawn process of attempts at amicable settlement, the parties agreed by consent terms dated 3.5.2019, to put an end to their misery by agreeing to specific terms of settlement. On 21.10.2021, an addendum was added to the aforesaid consent terms dated 3.5.2019. As a consequence of the consent terms, the parties have taken steps in the matter. Since the Criminal cases initiated against each other can be quashed by invoking Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. and Article 226 of the Constitution of India, both the parties are before this Court to give finality to the agreed terms between them.
2. Heard Mr. J. Supekar, learned Counsel for the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition Nos. 22 of 2022 (Filing) and 23 of 2022(Filing) and Ms. A. Desai, learned Counsel for the petitioner in Criminal Writ Petition No. 30 of 2022(Filing), as also Mr. P. Faldessai, learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondents in all petitions. Since the rival parties are represented through their Counsel, these Writ Petitions are taken up for disposal.
3. Clause XXIV of the consent terms dated 3.5.2019 executed between the parties reads as follows:-
Both parties have filed various cognizable criminal complaints against each other and third parties alleging commission of non-compoundable offences against each other. Both parties agree that due to the amicable settlement of disputes between the Respondent and the Petitioner, both parties hereby agree to consent to the quashing of the criminal proceedings/First Information Reports pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Mapusa, Goa and the Porvorim Police Station, Mapusa Police Station or any other police station. Both parties shall furnish an Affidavit to each other giving no objection to the quashing of such criminal proceedings/FIR to be filed before the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay at Goa.
4. In pursuance of the aforesaid clause of the consent agreement, these petitions have been filed for quashing of aforesaid criminal cases pending between the parties. The details of the said cases are as follows:-
(1) Criminal case IPC No. 558/2018/A wherein petitioner Sanju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 324, 504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC.
(2) Criminal case IPC No. 391/2018/F wherein petitioner Sanju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 279, 323 337 ,504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC.
(3) Criminal case IPC No. 77/2019/C wherein petitioner Anju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 324 ,504, 506(ii) of IPC.
(4) Criminal case IPC No. 356/2018 wherein petitioner Anju Jain is the accused, pending before Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Mapusa for offences under Sections 341 ,427, 504, 506(ii) read with 34 of IPC.
5. Since the Criminal cases essentially arose out of the matrimonial dispute between the parties and now that the parties have settled their inter se dispute and they do not wish to proceed with the criminal cases in terms of clause XXIV of the consent agreement quoted above, this Court is of the opinion that in the interest of justice, the present Writ Petitions deserve to be allowed in terms of prayer clauses in these Writ Petitions.
6. Accordingly, Criminal Writ Petition No. 22/2022/F, is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a). Similarly, Criminal Writ Petition No. 23/2022/F, is allowed in terms of the prayer clause (a) and Criminal Writ Petition No. 30/2022/F, is also allowed in t
AI
Consent terms between parties can be a basis for quashing criminal cases, especially when the parties have settled their dispute.
Criminal cases with a predominantly civil nature can be quashed if the parties have resolved their entire dispute and the possibility of conviction is remote.
Point of law: joint memorandum of settlement filed by the respective parties and in the light of the above decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court, it is appropriate to quash the criminal proceedings
Continuation of criminal proceedings becomes an abuse of law when matrimonial disputes are amicably resolved and the parties lead separate lives, warranting quashment.
The court can quash criminal proceedings in cases of private or personal disputes where the parties have resolved their entire dispute, and continuation of the case would cause oppression and prejudi....
The court's decision was influenced by the power of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings based on amicable settlement, as distinct from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.