IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY, J.
Aditya Maruka @ Aditya Murarka, son of Suresh Kumar Maruka - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand and Anr. - Opposite Parties
Cr.M.P. No.1982 of 2023
Decided On : 28-08-2023
Compromise - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, Sections 468, 469, 406, 420 - Code of Criminal Procedure, Section 482
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 468, 469, 406, 420 of the Indian Penal Code, citing a compromise between the parties and the absence of public policy involvement.
Finding of the Court:
The court considered the compromise between the parties and the nature of the dispute, concluding that the possibility of conviction was remote and bleak, and quashed the criminal proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on the compromise between the parties and the absence of public policy involvement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the Supreme Court's guidelines in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, emphasizing that in cases of private disputes with a remote possibility of conviction, quashing criminal proceedings is appropriate to prevent oppression and prejudice to the accused.
Final Decision: The court allowed the Criminal Miscellaneous Petition and quashed the entire criminal proceedings, including the First Information Report.
JUDGMENT :
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 entire criminal proceedings including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.100 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 468, 469, 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code which is now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly draw the attention of this Court towards the Interlocutory Application No.6305 of 2023 and submit that consequent upon a mediation before the Mediator appointed by JHALSA, matter has been amicably settled between the parties upon compromise. Learned counsel for both the parties jointly submit that the dispute between the parties has arisen out of commercial transaction. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since both the parties have settled their dispute, hence, the informant/opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed with the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that the dispute between the parties is a private dispute and no public policy is involved. Learned counsel for the petitioner next submits that in view of the compromise between the parties, the continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of law as in view of the compromise, the chances of conviction of the petitioner is remote and bleak. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceedings including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.100 of 2021 which is now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad, be quashed and set aside.
4. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State submits that in view of the compromise between the parties, the State has no serious objection for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.100 of 2021 which is now pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad.
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:-
“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
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others vs. State of Gujarat & Another
Quashing of criminal proceedings is justified in cases of private disputes with a remote possibility of conviction to prevent oppression and prejudice to the accused.
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.
The central legal point established is that the power to quash a criminal proceeding should be exercised to prevent abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice, particularly in cases wi....
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 secur....
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings based on compromise in private disputes if it serves justice and prevents abuse of process.
The power to quash criminal proceedings 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....
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 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....
The court's decision was influenced by the principle that in cases of private civil disputes with a complete settlement between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction being remote....
The High Court can quash FIRs in cases of private disputes where parties have settled, preventing abuse of process and securing justice.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.