AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Admit.
The applicants seek quashing of the First Information Report bearing Crime No.155/2026 registered with Police Station, Gondia City, District Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections 85 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Charge-sheet No.137/2026 filed in Regular Criminal Case No.191/2026 pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gondia on account of settlement.
The First Information Report indicates that marriage between applicant no.1 and non-applicant no.2/complainant was performed on 12.02.2024. Thereafter, non-applicant no.2 went to cohabit with applicant no.1. After 15 to 20 days of marriage, the family members of applicant no.1 started harassing the complainant on account of demand of dowry. Applicant nos.3 and 4 were insisting the complainant on bringing an amount of ₹5 lakhs and a car from her parents. In the month of April 2024, the applicants quarreled with the complainant on account of demand of dowry and assaulted her. It is alleged in the FIR that the applicants used to taunt the complainant by stating that she is not a good looking girl. Inspite of intervention from the parents of the complainant, the applicants refused to take complainant with them. Therefore, on the complaint of the complainant, the aforesaid offence came to be lodged against the applicants.
Non-applicant no.2 is present in the Court today. She has been duly identified by her counsel. Non-applicant no.2 has tendered across the bar, a joint settlement affidavit, which is taken on record and marked as “X” for identification. It is contended that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties. The affidavit indicates that the applicant and the complainant have parted ways by way of mutual divorce. Alongwith the joint settlement affidavit, a decree of mutual divorce is also placed on record. Non-applicant no.2 further contends in her affidavit that she does not want to prosecute the applicants and she has no objection if the FIR and the consequential proceedings are quashed.
The learned counsel for the applicants has tendered across the bar, a cheque of ₹3 lakhs payable to the complainant.
The present FIR is an outcome of a matrimonial discord between the applicant and non-applicant no.2. Both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court and have parted ways amicably. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings may become a hindrance in their future peaceful life.
In the decision in the case of B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, the Supreme Court has held as under:
“10.considering the scope of inherent power of quashing under Section 482, this Court held that in the exercise of this wholesome power, the High Court is entitled to quash proceedings if it comes to the conclusion that the ends of justice so require. It was observed that in a criminal case, the veiled object behind a lame prosecution, the very nature of the material on which the structure of the prosecution rests and the like would justify the High Court in quashing the proceeding in the interest of justice and that the ends of justice are higher than the ends of mere law though justice had got to be administered according to laws made by the legislature. This Court said that the compelling necessity for making these observations is that without a proper realization of the object and purpose of the provision which seeks to save the inherent powers of the High Court to do justice between the State and its subjects, it would be impossible to appreciate the width and contours of that salient jurisdiction. On facts, it was also noticed that there was no reasonable likelihood of the accused being convicted of the offence. What would happen to the trial of the case where the wife does not support the imputations made in the FIR of the type in question. As earlier noticed, now she has filed an affidavit that the FIR was registered at her instance due to temperamental differences and implied imputations. There may be many reasons for not supporting the imputations. It may be either for the reason that she has resolved disputes with her husband and his other family members and as a result thereof she has again started living with her husband with whom she earlier had differences or she has willingly parted company and is living happily on her own or has married someone else on the earlier marriage having been dissolved by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support the prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such eventuality, there would almost be no chance of conviction. Would it then be proper to decline to exercise power of quashing on the ground that it would be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offences? The answer clearly has to be in the “negative”. It would, however, be a different matter if the High Court on facts declines the prayer for quashing for any valid reasons including lack of bona fides.”
In view of the above, a case is made out for exercising the inherent powers of this Court to quash the FIR. Hence, the following order is passed:
The criminal application is allowed.
First Information Report bearing Crime No.155/2026 registered with Police Station, Gondia City, District Gondia for the offences punishable under Sections 85 read with Section 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and Charge-sheet No.137/2026 filed in Regular Criminal Case No.191/2026 pending on the file of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gondia, are hereby quashed and set aside subject to payment of costs of ₹20,000/- by the applicants to the District Bar Association, Gondia, Account No.0182000100041568 IFSC Code : PUNB0018200, Bank Name – Punjab National Bank, Gondia Branch within two weeks from the date of this order.
The application stands disposed of.