Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Abhishek Ravani @ Abhishek Rawanit @ Abhishek Kumar Rawani, son of Ganesh Ravani and Anr. - Petitioners
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Anr. - Opp. Parties
Cr. M.P. No. 501 of 2023
Decided On : 18-04-2023
Section 482 Cr.P.C. - Quashing of Criminal Proceeding - Indian Penal Code, Sections 323, 354/34 - POCSO Act, Section 8
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought to quash the criminal proceeding against them, citing a compromise with the complainant and arguing that the continuation of the case would amount to an abuse of process.
Finding of the Court:
The court, considering the compromise and settlement between the parties, found that the alleged offences were not heinous, the possibility of conviction was remote, and continuation of the criminal case would cause great oppression and prejudice to the accused. Therefore, the court quashed the entire criminal proceeding.
Issues: Whether the compromise between the parties warranted the quashing of the criminal proceeding and if the continuation of the case would amount to an abuse of process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, emphasizing that the High Court may quash criminal proceedings if the possibility of conviction is remote, and continuation of the case would cause oppression and prejudice to the accused despite a full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.
Final Decision: The entire criminal proceeding, including the order dated 11.05.2022, was quashed and set aside, and the criminal miscellaneous petition was allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 11.05.2022 passed in connection with Special POCSO Case No.41 of 2022, corresponding to Putki P.S. Case No.13 of 2022 arising out of Complaint Case No. 198 of 2022, whereby and where under, the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad has taken cognizance for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 354/34 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of POCSO Act against the petitioners which is now pending in the court of learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Dhanbad.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 jointly drawing attention of this Court to Interlocutory Application No. 3365 of 2023 which is supported by separate affidavits of the complainant-Pushpa Devi and the two petitioners submit that the petitioners and the opposite party no.2 namely Pushpa Devi has entered into a joint compromise with the intervention of well-wishers and close relatives. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the dispute between the parties is purely personal dispute and no public policy is involved in the offences. It is then submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the compromise has been entered into between the parties amicably without any coercion and threat and the informant does not want to proceed with the case. It is jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that no offence for which the FIR has been lodged is made out against the petitioners and the occurrence alleged leading to registration of the FIR is highly improbable.
4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners that prior to institution of this case by the complainant, the father of the petitioner no.2 namely Jyoti Lal Rawani lodged F.I.R. vide Putki (Munidih O.P.) P.S. Case No.116 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 379, 326, 307 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and as a counter blast, this case was instituted by the complainant-opposite party no.2 in a fit of anger. It is then submitted that in view of complete settlement between the parties and consequential restoration of harmony and goodwill, the continuance of this criminal proceeding vide Putki P.S. Case No.13 of 2022 arising out of Complaint Case No. 198 of 2022, corresponding to Special POCSO Case No.41 of 2022 involving the offence punishable under Sections 323, 354/34 of Indian Penal Code and under Section 8 of POCSO Act against the petitioners will amount to abuse of process of the Court as the case is allowed to proceed despite the compromise and settlement between the parties, in all likelihood will end up in acquittal of the petitioners. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding including the order dated 11.05.2022 passed in connection with Special POCSO Case No.41 of 2022, corresponding to Putki P.S. Case No.13 of 2022 arising out of Complaint Case No. 198 of 2022 be quashed.
5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has no objection for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in view of compromise and settlement between the parties.
6. Having heard the submissions made at the Bar and after going through the materials in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 has the occasion to consider the jurisdiction of the High Court under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure inter alia on the basis of compromise between the parties and has held in paragraph no.11 as under :-
The High Court may quash criminal proceedings if the possibility of conviction is remote, and continuation of the case would cause oppression and prejudice to the accused despite a full and complete ....
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure if the parties have settled their disputes, provided the offences are not heinous and the continuatio....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash a criminal proceeding should be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of the court and to secure the ends of justice....
High Court quashed non-heinous private dispute criminal proceedings upon voluntary compromise, as continuation would abuse process, render conviction remote, and cause prejudice, following guidelines....
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code when a compromise between parties suggests that continuation would be unjust or oppressive, provided the offenses are not h....
High Court may quash non-heinous private dispute proceedings under inherent powers where parties fully compromise, conviction becomes remote, and continuation abuses process.
The High Court has the power to quash criminal proceedings based on compromise, especially in cases of private disputes where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak.
In cases of matrimonial disputes with predominantly civil flavor, the High Court may quash criminal proceedings if the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak due to a settlement between the of....
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure when a private dispute is settled, and continuation would be an abuse of process.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
