The central legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 should be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice, especially in cases where the possibility of conviction is remote and continuation of the case would cause oppression and prejudice to the accused.

JUDGMENT :

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the order taking cognizance dated 03.03.2021 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi arising out of Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019 whereby and where under the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 352, 498-A, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly submit that a compromise has been effected to between the parties consequent upon mediation in the Mediation Centre, Civil Court, Ranchi and the parties, have agreed to resolve their dispute and dissolve their marriage by a decree of divorce passed by a competent court with mutual consent. Hence, it is jointly submitted by the parties that in view of the compromise between the parties, the opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed with case and the continuance of this case will amount of abuse of the process of the court and in view of compromise between the parties, the opposite party No.2 is not desirous of prosecuting the case and the chances of conviction of the petitioners is remote and bleak. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly draw the attention of this Court to the Supplementary Affidavit; in which the copy of the joint petition filed for dissolution of the marriage with mutual consent under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 in the Family Court, Ranchi vide Original Suit (M.T.S.) No.140 of 2022 kept at Annexure-A at page-6 to 14 of the Supplementary Affidavit. Learned counsel for the petitioners also draws the attention of this Court towards the Mediation Report kept at Annexure-B at page-19-21 of the said Supplementary Affidavit. It is then submitted that the order taking cognizance dated 03.03.2021 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi arising out of Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019 whereby and where under the learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 352, 498-A, 506, 34 of the Indian Penal Code as well as the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019 be quashed.

4. Learned Spl.P.P. appearing for the State submits that in view of compromise between the parties, the State has no serious objection for quashing the order taking cognizance dated 03.03.2021 passed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi arising out of Protest-cum-Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019 as well as the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.2584 of 2019.

5. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others vs. State of Gujarat & Another reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, had 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:-

“11. Section 482 is prefaced with an overriding provision. The statute saves the inherent power of the High Court, as a superior court, to make such orders as are necessary (i) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; or (ii) otherwise to secure the ends of justice. In Gian Singh [Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 : (2012) 4 SCC (Civ) 1188 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160 : (2012) 2 SCC (L&S) 988] a Bench of three learned Judges of this Court adverted to the body of precedent on the subject and laid down guiding princ