The Court can invoke inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash proceedings based on a genuine and voluntary compromise, considering the nature of the offence, societal impact, and the ends of justice.

JUDGMENT :

ANOOP CHITKARA, J.

1. The petitioners, who have been arraigned as accused in the above captioned FIR, have come up before this Court under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings based on the compromise with the victims.

2. The gist of the allegations against the petitioner(s) is that the complainant made a written complaint to the aforesaid police station in the following terms:-

She stated that her marriage was solemnized with Satyam (petitioner No.1) on 04.11.2018 and her father had given sufficient dowry and spent around Rs.7/8 lacs on marriage. After the wedding, her husband, father-in-law and mother-in-law starting behaving rudely and taunting about her appearance and colour. Her in-laws also deprived her from meeting her husband. They kept on demanding various dowry articles. It is needless to mention further details and all the allegations made out prima facie case under Section 498A IPC which likely to register the above captioned FIR.

3. During the pendency of the petition, the accused and the injured have compromised the matter, and its copy is annexed with this petition. After that, the petitioners have come up before this Court to quash the FIR, and in the quashing petition, the injured have been impleaded as respondent(s).

4. On the prayer of the parties, the Court had permitted the parties to appear before the concerned Court to record their statements. As per the concerned Sessions Court's report, the victim(s), without any threat, consented to the quashing of FIR and consequent proceedings.

ANALYSIS & REASONING:

5. In the present case, the dispute is matrimonial and with the intervention of relatives it has been sorted out. As per the report of the Judcial Magistrate 1st Class, Barnala, the parties had made statement on oath in which they supported the compromise. As per the report, it was also mentioned that the compromise appeared to be genuine, voluntarily and without any coercion or undue influence.

6. The following aspects would be relevant to conclude this petition: -

a) The accused and the private respondent(s) have amicably settled the matter between them in terms of the compromise deed and the statements recorded before the concerned Court;

b) A perusal of the documents reveal that the settlement has not been secured through coercion, threats, social boycotts, bribes, or other dubious means;

c) The victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings;

d) There is no objection from the private respondents in case present FIR and consequent proceedings are quashed;

e) In the given facts, the occurrence does not affect public peace or tranquillity, moral turpitude or harm the social and moral fabric of the society or involve matters concerning public policy;

f) The rejection of compromise may also lead to ill will. The pendency of trial affects career and happiness;

g) There is nothing on the record to prima facie consider the accused as an unscrupulous, habitual, or professional offender;

h) The purpose of criminal jurisprudence is reformatory in nature and to work to bring peace to family and society;

i) The ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power by quashing the FIR and the consequent proceedings.

7. In the present case, the offence under S. 498-A IPC is not compoundable under Section 320 CrPC. However, in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, the prosecution qua the non-compoundable offences can be closed by quashing the FIR and consequent proceedings.

8. In Saloni Rupam Bhartiya v. Rupam Prahlad Bhartiya, 2015(4) R.C.R.(Criminal) 172, a three Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court holds,

[4] …It was submitted by learned counsel for the parties