High Courts may quash criminal proceedings in matrimonial disputes when parties have settled their differences through mediation, as such cases are private in nature and continuing the trial would be an abuse of the process of law when conviction is unlikely.

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 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 with the prayer to quash the criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.4778 of 2023 involving the offences punishable under Sections 498A , 323/341, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act including the order taking cognizance dated 22.06.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class, Jamshedpur whereby and where under cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 498A of the Indian Penal Code has been taken against the petitioner and the said case is now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class at Jamshedpur.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2/complainant jointly submit that in view of the mediation between the parties, the dispute between the parties has been settled and, in this respect, learned counsel for the petitioner draws the attention of this Court towards terms of the settlement arrived at between the parties after the mediation. It is further jointly submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the complainant/ opposite party No.2 of this case that in view of settlement between the parties by way of mediation, the informant does not want to proceed with the case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dispute between the parties is a matrimonial 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 chances of conviction of the petitioner is remote and bleak. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.4778 of 2023 including the order taking cognizance dated 22.06.2024 which is now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class at Jamshedpur, be quashed and set aside.

4. 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 and setting aside the entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No.4778 of 2023 including the order taking cognizance dated 22.06.2024 which is now pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st Class at Jamshedpur.

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 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 learned Judges of this Court adverted to the body of precedent on the subject and laid down guiding principles which the High Cour