The court affirmed that inherent powers under Section 482 allow quashing of FIRs for non-compoundable offences in personal disputes if it serves justice, despite the serious nature of the charges.

ORDER :

1. Through the medium of the instant petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now repealed and replaced by Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 but applicable in the case and hereinafter referred to as the “Code” for short), the petitioner has sought the quashment of the FIR bearing No. 100 of 2020, dated 29.07.2020 registered with the Police Station, Zaipora Shopian under Sections 452 and 376B on the grounds, inter alia, that he has been falsely and frivolously implicated in the impugned case FIR when he is innocent and has not committed the alleged crime; that lodgement of the impugned FIR is just an afterthought and the case is purely concocted, fabricated, baseless and manufactured aimed at to settle personal scores with him; that actually he entered into a marriage agreement with the complainant/respondent No. 3 on 10-12-2017, which was followed by the performance of Nikah Ceremony on 29^th October, 2018; that subsequently on 06.12.2018, he along with the respondent No. 3 approached this Court through a petition bearing OWP No. 2296/2018 seeking protection which was granted; that subsequently the respondent No. 3/complainant went to her parental home and her parents counselled and pressurised her to abstain from his matrimonial company so much so that a Khula Nama was drafted on which he was forced to sign on 10.07.2020; that subsequently on 29^th July, 2020, the respondent No. 3 was made to lodge a complaint against him in the Police Station Zainpora Shopian leading to the registration of impugned case FIR No. 100 of 2020 under Sections 452 and 376B IPC against him which is outcome of the abuse of the powers of the police concerned, thus deserving to be quashed in the ends of justice.

2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Deputy Advocate General for respondents 1 and 2.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that during the pendency of the instant petition, the petitioner/accused and the respondent No.3/complainant (victim) have entered into a mutual settlement and have also executed a formal compromise deed dated 13.09.2022 which has been placed on record of the petition after permission of the Court. He submitted that as per the terms of the compromise, the parties have agreed that their marriage stands dissolved through mutual settlement otherwise called Khula; that their statements also stand recorded by the Registrar Judicial of this Court pursuant to the Court order dated 27.09.2022; that in their statements recorded before the Registry, they have admitted the contents of the compromise deed.

4. The learned counsel further contended that this Court has got extraordinary powers in terms of the provisions of Section 482 of theCode to quash the impugned FIR as the same has become desirable rather justified in the facts and circumstances of the case. The learned counsel submitted that the power of this Court under Section 482 of the Code is not subject to the provisions of Section 320 of the Code providing for compounding of some offences. He submitted that the Hon’ble Apex Court has allowed the quashment of the FIR and consequent criminal proceedings by invoking the inherent jurisdiction vested in the High Courts, in justified circumstances, where matrimonial disputes are amicably settled between the complainant/victim and the accused, so as to meet the ends of justice.

5. The learned counsel in support of his arguments placed reliance on the authoritative judgments of the Hon’ble Apex Court cited as “Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors vs State of Gujarat and Anr. (2017) 9 SCC 641” and “Kapil Gupta Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)and Anr 2022 15 SCC 44”.

6. The learned State Counsel, Mr. Mubashir Majid Malik, Dy. AG, however, submitted that since the impugned FIR has been registered under Sections 452 and 367B of the Indian Penal Code which offences are non- compoundable, as such, the petition does not deserve to be al