IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

Cr.M.P. No.3456 of 2024

------

1. Akhtar Khan Aged about 46 years Son of Saghir Khan, R/o

Village- Karari, P.O. + P.S.- Durgawati, District- Bhabhua, State-

Bihar- 821105

2. Armanullah Khan @ Arman aged about 31 years son of Late

Assadullah Khan R/o Village- Karari, P.O. + P.S.- Durgawati,

District- Bhabhua, State- Bihar- 821105

3. Ansari Begum aged about 56 years wife of Late Assadullah Khan

R/o Village- Karari, P.O. + P.S.- Durgawati, District- Bhabhua,

State- Bihar- 821105

… Petitioners

Versus

1. The State of Jharkhand

2. Shoaib Ahmad Khan S/o Late Jamaluddin Khan, R/o Khan

Cottage, Firdaus Nagar, Manitola, P.O. & P.S.- Doranda, District-

Ranchi- 834002, Jharkhand

… Opposite Parties

------

For the Petitioners : Mr. Anup Kr. Agrawal, Advocate

For the State : Mrs. Nehala Sharmin, Spl.P.P.

For the O.P. No.2 : Ms. Nirupama, Advocate

------

P R E S E N T

HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY

By the Court:- Heard the parties.

2. This Criminal Miscellaneous Petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S., 2023 with the prayer to quash the order dated 05.07.2019 passed by the learned Sub- case for the offences punishable under Section 323 and 504 of the Indian

Penal Code and also the entire proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.4443 of 2018 and the said case is now pending in the court of learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly draw attention of this Court to the supplementary affidavit dated 29.11.2025, filed on behalf of the opposite party No.2- victim and submit that the parties have entered into a compromise and consequent upon the same, a joint declaration has been made and filed before the Family Court, Varanasi. In view of the compromise, the opposite party No.2- victim is not interested to proceed with the case. It is next submitted that the genesis of the occurrence is a marital dispute between the parties. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 further submit that the dispute between the parties is a private dispute and no public policy is involved in this case. It is next submitted that in view of the settlement 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 petitioners is remote and bleak. It is further submitted that the same prayer of the co-accused namely Firoza Khanam has already been allowed by this Court vide the judgment dated 03rd September, 2024 passed in Cr.M.P. No. 3006 of 2019. Hence, it is submitted that the order dated 05.07.2019 passed by the learned Sub- case for the offence punishable under Section 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and also the entire proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.4443 of 2018, 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 objection for quashing the order dated 05.07.2019 passed by the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi whereby and where under the learned Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ranchi has found prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and also the entire proceeding in connection with Complaint Case No.4443 of 2018. 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