Read Time: 04 minutes
The court noted “once the parties have arrived at a settlement as regards the basis of the dispute, allowing the prosecution to continue merely because the offence alleged against the accused is non-compoundable in nature, would amount to great injustice to both the parties who happen to be the spouses.”
In a significant decision, the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has quashed a First Information Report (FIR) pertaining to Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), dealing with the offence of ‘Husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty’.
Justice Puneet Gupta, presiding over the case, observed that “once the parties have arrived at a settlement as regards the basis of the dispute, allowing the prosecution to continue merely because the offence alleged against the accused is non-compoundable in nature, would amount to great injustice to both the parties who happen to be the spouses. In fact, it will amount to frittering away the fruits of compromise that has been arrived at between the parties, who want to live peacefully without any dispute as husband and wife. The continuance of criminal proceedings against the petitioner, in these circumstances, will be nothing, but an abuse of process of law.”
The case, briefly outlined, involved the petitioner who got married to respondent No.2-complainant in 2002, resulting in the birth of two children. Subsequently, a dispute arose when the petitioner, stationed at Gool Ramban, urged the respondent to return and reside with him. This led to the respondent filing cases under the provisions of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005 and an FIR under Section 498-A of IPC.
During the course of proceedings, both parties mutually decided to settle their dispute and entered into a compromise before the court of Special Mobile Magistrate/Sub Judge Budgam on April 18, 2024. This compromise was later affirmed before the Registrar Judicial Srinagar on May 10, 2024.
The court, after hearing counsels and examining the evidence, noted that the parties had reached an amicable settlement, with the respondent deciding not to pursue the cases against the petitioner. Further, the court emphasised that continuing prosecution despite such a settlement would be unjust and an abuse of legal process.
Invoking its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.PC, the court ordered the quashing of the FIR and associated proceedings “so as to secure the ends of justice.”
Cause Title: Dr.Ashfaq Hassan v Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir [CRM(M) No.83/2024]
Please Login or Register
