High Court may quash non-heinous private dispute proceedings under inherent powers where parties fully compromise, conviction becomes remote, and continuation abuses process.

JUDGMENT :

Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.

Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 08.06.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class - XXVII, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 262 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3245 of 2018 involving the offences punishable under Sections 323, 341, 448, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case is next fixed for appearance of the accused persons and charge has not yet been framed in this case.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party No.2/informant jointly draw the attention of this Court towards Interlocutory Application No.2364 of 2026 which is supported by the separate affidavits of the petitioner as well as the opposite party No.2/informant and submit that therein, it has categorically been mentioned that during the pendency of this Criminal Miscellaneous Petition due to intervention of common friends, family members and well-wishers, the matter has been compromised between the parties. It is next jointly submitted that in view of the compromise between the parties, the informant/opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed with the case against the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the parties is a private dispute and no public policy is involved in this case. 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 chance of conviction of the petitioner is remote and bleak. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 08.06.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class - XXVII, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 262 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3245 of 2018, be quashed and set aside.

5. Learned Addl.P.P. appearing for the State submits that in view of the compromise between the parties, the State has no objection for quashing the entire criminal proceedings including the order taking cognizance dated 08.06.2022 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate- 1st Class - XXVII, Ranchi in connection with Jagarnathpur P.S. Case No. 262 of 2018 corresponding to G.R. Case No. 3245 of 2018.

6. 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 l