Point of Law: Cruelty - Quash of FIR - 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 - This is a fit case where the inherent powers of Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. could be exercised for securing ends of justice.

ORDER :

1. This application has been filed under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing and setting aside the FIR being I-CR. No. 25 of 2017 dated 24.7.2017 against the applicants registered with Mahila Police Station Anand (City), District: Anand for offence punishable under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506(2), 114 of the IPC and Sections 3 and 7 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

2. Mr. D.H.Bharwad, 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 son of the applicants had voluntarily filed Petition for dissolution of marriage by way of mutual consent under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act before the Family Court at Anand being Family Suit No.218/2019 and the said Application was allowed by order dated 28.8.2020 and, therefore, in the larger interest of the society, the impugned complaint may be quashed and set aside.

2.1 Learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the Court may verify the said aspect from the original complainant, respondent no.3- Shruti W/o. Saurabh Anilbhai Dave.

3. Mr. Hiren Somaiya, learned advocate for respondent no.3, original complainant, concurred with the factum of settlement of the dispute, as advanced by learned advocate Mr. D.H.Bharwad appearing for the applicants.

4. The Respondent No.3 - 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.3 - complainant and the son of the applicants. The respondent no. 3, original complainant, categorically stated that she has no grievance against the applicants and that she has no objection to the quashment of the impugned first information report filed by her.

5. 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.

6. This Court has heard the learned advocates on both the sides and has perused the material on record. The respondent no. 3–original complainant affirmed that dispute with the applicant has been amicably resolved with the intervention of family members and other elder members of the society and the settlement has been arrived at between the parties and now there is no ill-will and grievance amongst them. The Affidavit by Respondent No.3- original complainant as well as the order dated 28.8.2020 passed passed by Principal Judge, Family Court, Anand vide Family Suit No.218/2019 allowing the application under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act for dissolution of marriage by mutual consent is also on record.

7. 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 Committ