Point of Law: Kidnapping - Saving inherit powers of High Court - Section 482 of Code, High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where parties have settled matter between themselves.

JUDGMENT :

S.K. Panigrahi, J.

1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘Cr.P.C.’) has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 14.10.2019 passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Bhadrak in G.R. Case No.434 of 2017 which arises out of Bhadrak Town P.S. Case No.53 of 2017 under Sections 363,366,120(B) read with 34 of I.P.C. and all proceedings consequent thereto.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts of the present case are that the Opposite Party No.2 had lodged an FIR before the IIC, Bhadrak Town Police Station on 02.03.2017 alleging that his daughter, one Rajalaxmi Behera aged about 16 years had been kidnapped by the Petitioner No.1. The daughter of Opposite Party No.2 was studying +2 Arts in Bhadrak College and staying in Behera Mess, Januganja, Bhadrak. On 26.02.2017, the daughter called the Opposite Party No.2 and told him that she will be visiting them that day. However, when she did not reach, Opposite Party No.2 started searching for her and found out that his daughter had left the mess at 8 A.M. with all her belongings. The Opposite Party No.2 doubted that the petitioner No.1 had a role to play in this as when the petitioner No.1 was working as a Carpenter in Opposite Party No.2’s house, the Opposite Party No.2 had discovered that his daughter and the petitioner No.1 were talking a lot and possibly were in a relationship. The Opposite Party No.2 had then asked the other petitioners about the whereabouts of his daughter but upon receiving no satisfactory answer, he had filed the F.I.R in Bhadrak Town P.S. During the course of investigation, the petitioner No.2 and petitioner No.3 were arrested and forwarded to court, but they were then released on bail.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners earnestly contended that the allegations in the FIR are false and have been lodged with an ulterior motive to harass and humiliate the petitioners. It was submitted that the petitioner No.1 and daughter of Opposite Party No.2 were in a romantic relationship and had eloped together. They have been married since 2018 as per Hindu rites and a male child has been born out of their wedlock in 2019. It was also submitted that they have been living happily and due to the intervention of their well-wishers, a settlement has been arrived at between all the parties wherein the family members of the daughter of Opposite Party No.2 have got the visiting rights to meet their grandchild. Opposite Party No.2 has also agreed not to pursue this case any further and the parties have arrived at a settlement. It is also pertinent to note that during investigation, the victim, i.e., the daughter of the Opposite Party No.2 appeared in the police station and her statement u/s.161 Cr.P.C. was recorded wherein she has categorically stated that she had left with petitioner No.1 out of her own free will and nobody had kidnapped her.

4. Heard learned counsel for the State. The learned counsel for the State acknowledges and confirms the settlement arrived at between the parties.

5. Heard the rival parties of the case and perused the case diary to delve deeper into the case. It becomes imperative while dealing with a case under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to remember that the plenitude of the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by itself, makes it obligatory for the High Court to exercise the same with utmost care and caution. The width and the nature of the power demands that its exercise is sparing and only in cases where the High Court is of the clear view that continuance of the prosecution would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law.

6. Section 482 of the Code reads as follows :

“Saving of inherent power of High Court-Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”

The Section envisages three circum