IMPORTANT POINT
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the power to quash criminal proceedings should be exercised to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the process of any court. In cases of private disputes where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak due to a compromise between the parties, the court may quash the criminal proceedings to prevent oppression and prejudice to the accused.

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 First Information Report as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Mahila Thana P.S. Case No.59 of 2020 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi.

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.6372 of 2023 which is supported by the affidavit of the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 and submit that therein it has been mentioned that during the course of the proceedings of Original Matrimonial Suit No.420 of 2021 now pending in the Family Court, Ranchi upon mediation at Mediation Centre, Ranchi and with the intervention of common well-wishers and family friends, the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 have compromised the case and settled all their dispute. It is next jointly submitted that in view of the compromise, a petition for dissolution of the marriage between the petitioner and the opposite party No.2 under Section 13 (B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 has been filed in the Family Court, Ranchi on 21.02.2023 and the opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed with the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the parties is a private dispute and no public policy is involved and because of some marital discord between the petitioner and opposite party No.2, this case was instituted but under the changed circumstances and in view of the compromise, the continuation of this criminal proceeding will amount to abuse of process of court as in view of the compromise, the chances of conviction of the petitioner is remote and bleak. Hence, it is submitted that the First Information Report as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Mahila Thana P.S. Case No.59 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi be quashed and set aside.

4. Learned Spl.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 First Information Report as well as the entire criminal proceedings arising out of Mahila Thana P.S. Case No.59 of 2020 pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Ranchi.

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 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