Point of Law: Criminal Intimidation – FIR quashed – Inherent powers of high Court - While exercising power under Section 482 of Code to quash criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on ground that there is a settlement/compromise between victim and offender, High Court is required to consider antecedents of accused; conduct of accused, whether accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with complainant to enter into a compromise etc.

ORDER :

1. Rule. Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned Additional Public Prosecutor and Mr. Premal Joshi, learned advocate, waive service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent Nos.1 & 2 respectively.

2. This application has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the FIR being CR. No.II- 3036 of 2020 against the applicants registered with Sarkhej Police Station, Dist.: Ahmedabad for offfences punishable under sections 294(b), 506(1) and 114 of the IPC.

3. Mr.Vandan Baxi, learned advocate for the applicants, submitted that the matrimonial issues have been settled and the parties have mutually separated by decree of divorce and there remains no grievance between them. It was submitted that the complainant and the applicants had voluntarily filed Application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for Decree of Divorce before the Family Court at Ahmedabad vide H.M.P. No.954 of 2021 and the said Application was allowed by order dated 12.07.2021 and, therefore, in the larger interest of the society, the impugned complaint may be quashed and set aside. 3.1 Learned advocate submitted that the Court may verify the said aspect from the original complainant, respondent no.2.

4. Mr. Premal Joshi, learned advocate for respondent no.2, original complainant, identifies the complainant – Vishal Shah before the virtual Court and concurred with the factum of settlement of the dispute, as advanced by learned advocate Mr. Vandan Baxi appearing for the applicants.

5. The Respondent No.2- complainant is present before the virtual court. The virtual Court verified about the settlement arrived at between the parties and the fact regarding dissolution of the marriage between the Respondent No.2 - complainant and his wife Manushi Shah. The respondent no.2, original complainant, categorically stated that he has no grievance against the applicants and that he has no objection to the quashment of the impugned first information report filed by her.

6. Ms. Monali Bhatt, learned APP submitted that any First Information Report should be quashed in accordance with the guidelines of the Apex Court and the parameters laid down therein. 7. This Court has heard the learned advocates on both the sides and has perused the material on record. The respondent no.2 – original complainant affirmed that dispute with the applicants has been amicably resolved with the intervention of friends and relatives and the settlement has been arrived at between the parties. The Affidavit by Respondent No.2- original complainant is on record. It has been jointly stated that the Family Court at Ahmedabad has allowed the application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for Decree of Divorce vide order dated 12.07.2021 in H.M.P. No.954 of 2021.

8. In the case of Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar and another V. Union of India, Ministry of Law and Justice and others, reported in 2018 (10) SCC 443, the Apex Court made an elaborate discussion on the scope and powers of the High Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in matrimonial matters. The observations made in paragraphs- 15, 39 and 40 are relevant. It read thus:-

“15. On the aforesaid bedrock, a prayer in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 73 of 2015 has been made to have a uniform policy of registration of FIR, arrest and bail in cases of Section 498-A IPC. It is worthy to note here that during the pendency of this Writ Petition, the judgment had been pronounced in Rajesh Sharma (supra). The Court in Rajesh Sharma (supra) issued the following guidelines:-

“19.(i) (a) In every district one or more Family Welfare Committees be constituted by the District Legal Services Authorities preferably comprising of three members. The constitution and working of such committees may be reviewed from time to time and at least once in a year by the District and Sessions Judge of the district who is also the Chairman of the District Legal Services Authority.

(b) The Committees may be constituted out of para l