Matrimonial Offences Including S.498A IPC May Be Quashed In Exercise Of Powers U/S 482 CrPC When Parties Arrive At Settlement: J&K&L High Court

The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently ruled that offences arising out of matrimony, where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the High Court will be within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings.

The bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar was hearing a plea whereby the petitioner had sought quashing of an FIR for offences under Section 498A IPC and the consequent criminal proceedings pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate Srinagar.

The petitioner submitted that the petitioner was married to one Mehnaz Siddiqui (the complainant in impugned FIR), who hails from Karachi Pakistan, as per Muslim Personal Law in the year 2009. The petitioner also contended that some personal differences and dispute arose between the parties, which ultimately resulted in divorce between the parties on 11.09.2017. It is contended in the petition that the parties filed various litigations against each other in the form of civil suit, writ petition, petition under Section 125 CrPC and the same is pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate 13th Finance Commission(Sub Judge), Srinagar.

The petitioner also brought to the notice of the court that that during the pendency of all these proceedings, a compromise was arrived at between the parties as per this which the parties have settled their disputes amicably and have also withdrawn the cases pending between them as they want to live peacefully without involving themselves in further litigation. It is further stated in the compromise deed that the complainant does not want to pursue the impugned FIR.

The Petitioner further submitted that so far as the case arising out of FIR No.19/2018, which is pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate Srinagar, is concerned, the same could not be compounded because the offence of which cognizance has been taken by the Court against the petitioner is non-compoundable in nature and it was in these circumstances that the petitioner was constrained to approach the High Court for seeking quashing of the aforesaid FIR and the criminal proceedings arising there from.

The moot question that fell for adjudication was as to whether this Court has power to quash the proceedings, particularly when some of the offences alleged to have been committed by the petitioner are non compoundable in nature.

Adjudicating the matter Justice Sanjay Dhar observed that the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the High Court will be within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings if it is known that because of the compromise arrived at between the parties, there is remote possibility of securing conviction of the accused. In fact, in such cases, the Supreme Court has clearly observed that it would amount to extreme injustice if despite settlement having been arrived at by the parties, the criminal proceedings are allowed to continue, the bench underscored.

Buttressing the said position the bench placed reliance on a Judgement of Supreme court in Gian Singh. v. State of Punjab & another, reported in (2012) wherein SC observed,

"But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim".

Dealing with the contentions raised the bench observed it is clear that the parties to the matrimonial dispute i.e., petitioner and the complainant, have entered into a compromise and that compromise has also been acted upon by the parties, inasmuch as the cases and counter cases lodged by the parties against each other have been withdrawn/compounded. Merely because the offences under Section 498A RPC, for which petitioner is facing trial on the basis of the complaint made by the complainant, is non-compoundable, if an end is not put to the criminal proceedings, it would amount to grave injustice to the petitioner and, in fact, it will amount to frittering away of the fruits of compromise that has been arrived at between the parties and therefore the continuance of criminal proceedings against the petitioner, in these circumstances, will be nothing but an abuse of process of law, the bench maintained.

Allowing the petition the court accordingly quashed the FIR and the consequent proceedings emanating there from and pending before the Court of Special Mobile Magistrate Srinagar.

Case Title : Abdullah Danish Shervani Vs UT of J&K

Citation : 2022 LiveLaw (JKL) 146

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment