IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the power of the High Court to quash a criminal proceeding under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of any court, particularly in cases with a civil flavor and where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak due to a settlement and compromise between the parties.

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 in connection with Complaint Case No. 1310 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 25.02.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih whereby and where under, the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih has taken cognizance for the offence punishable under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 by drawing attention of this Court to the Interlocutory Application No.6187 of 2023 which is a joint compromise petition supported by separate affidavits of the petitioner no.1 and the opposite party no.2 submits that therein it has been mentioned that the parties have already settled their dispute outside the Court and the dispute between the parties is a private dispute. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that because of some misunderstanding, the opposite party no.2 alleged that in fraudulent manner, the petitioners used their power of attorney and sold her and her brother’s and sister’s property. It is next submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 that the dispute is having essentially a civil flavor. Hence, it is submitted that for the ends of justice the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 1310 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 25.02.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih be quashed and set aside.

4. Learned Addl. P.P. submits that the State has no objection to the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No. 1310 of 2018 including the order taking cognizance dated 25.02.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Giridih in view of the compromise between the parties.

5. 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 :-

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 principles which the High Court should consider in determining as to whether to quash an FIR or complaint in the exercise of the inherent jurisdiction. The considerations which must weigh with the High Court are : (SCC pp. 342-43, para 61)

“61. … 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 the victim have settled their dispute would d