Back
1992 Supreme(Del) 403
High Court Of Delhi
ARVIND BHUSHAN CHUGH - Appellant
Versus
PROMILLA @ RITU - Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL 2216 of 1992
Decided On : 08/10/1992
O.P.DUTTA, O.P.VADHVA, R.P.Jolly
The court has inherent power to compound a non-compoundable offence when the interest of justice so requires, especially in cases arising from settled matrimonial disputes.
Headnote:
Inherent Power - Matrimonial Dispute - Court has inherent power to compound a non-compoundable offence when the interest of justice so requires
Fact of the Case:
The parties were married but the marriage broke down irretrievably, leading to criminal cases being registered. After the dissolution of the marriage and settlement of differences, the parties sought to quash the criminal cases initiated by the respondent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that since the matrimonial differences had been settled and the parties had reached a compromise, there was no reason to continue with the criminal cases. The court invoked its inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings in the interest of justice.
Issues: The main issue was whether the court could quash the criminal cases arising from matrimonial differences after the parties had settled their disputes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that it has inherent power to compound a non-compoundable offence when the interest of justice so requires, especially in cases arising from matrimonial disputes that have been settled by the parties.
Final Decision: The court ordered the quashing of the criminal proceedings initiated on the basis of the FIR, and all proceedings were ordered to be dropped.
( 1 ) SH. Arvind Bhushanchugh, petitioner No. 1, was married to Dr. Promilla alias Ritu, according to Hindu rites on 30th March, 1985. No child is born from this wed lock. After the marriage differences arose between the parties and marriage broke down irretrievably. On account of the fact that the respondent s stri Dhan was kept by the petitioner she lodged a report with the police for return of her dowry articles as well as for cruelty on the basis of which a case was registered vide FIR No. 422/86, under Sections 406/498-A/34 IPC, Beside Arvind Bhushan, his elder brother Jagdish Lal Chugh, his sister-in-law Smt. Kusum Bala Chugh and his mother Smt. Sita Devi were also made as accused. On account of the differences between the parties, the present case was got registered. In the meantime compromise was arrived at between the husband and wife, as a result of which they filed a petition for divorce by mutual consent. The marriage has been dissolved by mutual consent, by the Addl. Distt. judge, Delhi, on 14th July, 1992.
( 2 ) AFTER dissolution of the marriage, parties sorted out their other differences also and settled dowry articles, past and future maintenance and decided not to continue with the litigation. Accordingly they want that the criminal cases initiated on the complaint of the respondent No. 1 be quashed.
( 3 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 has to receive Rs. 1,50. 000. 00 which was lying deposited with the advocate for petitioner, Sh. O. P. Dutta. But this-is after the. quashing of the present criminal proceedings. After receiving this amount respondent No. 1 wants to withdraw her complaint and does not want to wash her dirty linen in public. The law is meant to do justice and not to force the parties for a protacted litigation. This Court has inherent power to compound a non-compoundable offence when the interest of justice so requires. In this case since the complaint had arisen out of matrimonial differences which ultimately having been settled, I see no reason why they should continue with the criminal cases after they have settled their differences. I accordingly order that th (f FIR No, 422/86, under Sec. 406/498 A/34, IPC, Police Station Rajouri Garden- be hereby quashed and all proceedings initiated on the basis of the said FIR are ordered to be dropped.
