Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

A Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar, of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court, while allowing a petition, quashed an impugned FIR (under Sections 498-A/109, Ranbir Penal Code), considering the amicable settlement of the matrimonial dispute between the parties, through a compromise. The fact in issue was that the FIR so registered was for non-compoundable offences.

In the pertinent matter the petitioners solemnized their marriage in accordance with the Hindu rituals at Jammu, but due to certain personal differences dispute arose, and resultantly started living separately. Thereafter, the wife (petitioner 2) lodged the impugned FIR. And during the pendency they even resolved the matter amicably, on reaching a compromise. Pursuant to which the petitioners had prayed for quashing the impugned FIR and the consequent proceedings.

The contention that was put up to oppose was that it could not be compounded because they are non compoundable in nature

Now, the question before the Court was whether the Court has the power to quash the proceedings, particularly when some of the offences alleged to have been committed  are non-compoundable in nature.

The Bench while deciding in affirmation, opined, "it is clear that where the offender and the victim have settled their disputes and the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, the continuation of criminal proceedings where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature, 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". Further, that it would amount o grave injustice if quashing of the proceedings was denied to.

The Court while quashing the criminal proceedings in the matter, referred to Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, and Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & anr, (2014) 6 SCC 466, which have laid the jurisprudence on the relevant matter.

Justice Dhar further opined that, "Merely because the offences alleged in the FIR are non-compoundable, if an end is not put to the criminal proceedings, it would amount to grave injustice to the petitioners and, in fact, it will amount to frittering away of the fruits of compromise that has been arrived at".

Case Title: Pinky Jain and ors. vs UT of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.pdf