The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of matrimonial disputes where the parties have resolved their entire dispute and there is a remote possibility of securing conviction, the High Court has the jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.

JUDGMENT :

SANJAY DHAR, J.

1. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashment for FIR No. 19/2018 for offences under Section 498A RPC registered at Police Station, Nigeen Srinagar and the consequent criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate 13th Finance Commission (Sub Judge), Srinagar.

2. The case set up by the petitioner is that he was married to one Mehnaz Siddiqui (the complainant in impugned FIR), who hails from Karachi Pakistan, as per Muslim Personal Law in the year 2009. It is contended that some personal differences and dispute arose between the parties, which ultimately resulted in divorce between the parties on 11.09.2017. It is contended in the petition that the parties filed various litigations against each other in the form of civil suit, writ petition, petition under Section 488 Cr.P.C. and various other criminal complaints besides lodging the impugned FIR against the petitioner, which ultimately culminated into presentation of a charge sheet and the same is pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate 13th Finance Commission (Sub-Judge), Srinagar.

3. It seems that during the pendency of all these proceedings, a compromise was arrived at between the parties and, accordingly, a compromise deed dated 17th day of November, 2018, was executed by the parties which has been placed on record and annexed as Annexure-V to the petition. As per this compromise deed, the parties have settled their disputes amicably and have also withdrawn the cases pending between them as they want to live peacefully without involving themselves in further litigation. It is further stated in the compromise deed that the complainant does not want to pursue the impugned FIR.

4. Petitioner has contended that so far as the case arising out of FIR No. 19/2018, which is pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate 13th Finance Commission (Sub-Judge), Srinagar, is concerned, the same could not be compounded because the offence of which cognizance has been taken by the learned Court against the petitioner is non-compoundable in nature. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner has approached this Court for seeking quashment of the aforesaid FIR and the criminal proceedings arising there from.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

6. So far as the facts alleged in the petition, particularly those pertaining to the compromise arrived at between the parties in terms of compromise deed dated 17th November, 2018, are concerned, the same are not disputed.

7. In the backdrop of aforesaid facts, the question arises as to whether this Court has power to quash the proceedings, particularly when some of the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are non-compoundable in nature. The Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, while considering this aspect, has observed as under:

“57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz. (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. canno