The High Court can quash non-compoundable criminal proceedings under Section 482 when the parties have amicably settled their dispute, provided the offences are not serious in nature.

JUDGMENT :

Sanjay Kumar Pachori, J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

2. Heard Sri Anand Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Dan Bahadur Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri R.K. Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.

3. The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 16454 of 2020 (State Vs. Mohd. Momin and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 26 of 2020, under Sections 452, 354, 504 , 506 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station-Bajaria, District-Kanpur Nagar as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 3.10.2020, pending in the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar on the basis of compromise executed between the parties on 29.7.2024.

4. Learned counsel for both the parties jointly submit that the parties have settled their dispute out of the court with regard to offence punishable under Sections 452, 354, 504, 506, I.P.C. by way of compromise on 29.7.2024 and the said compromise was verified on 19.10.2024. Certified copy of the verified compromise and proceedings of compromise have been filed as Annexure S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit. On being arrived at mutual consent, both the parties have come to terms and decided to part their ways and therefore, no useful purpose would be served to keep the matter alive and pending the present case be finally decided.

5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 argued that as the applicants have already arrived at amicable settlement on 29.7.2024, therefore, opposite party no. 2 is no more interested to pursue the case any more against the applicants.

6. Both the parties entered into a amicable settlement, and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and has jointly submitted that in the interest of justice the proceedings may be quashed in the light of the compromise.

7. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed that: (SCC p.340, para 58).

"58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.."

8. Where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. [Vide: Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692].

9. In Parbathbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinghbhai Karmur & Others v. State of Gujarat & Another, (2017) 9 SCC 641, after referring the various precedents on the subject, summarized the broad principles relating to the inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code as under: (SCC, p. 653, para 16)

"16.1. Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.

16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure , 1973. The po