Uttarakhand High Court Quashes Charge-Sheet and Proceedings Under Section 528 BNSS, 2023 Based on Amicable Settlement in Matrimonial Dispute Involving Allegations of Cruelty and Threats

Court’s Decision:

The Uttarakhand High Court quashed the charge-sheet and summoning order under Sections 498-A and 506 IPC based on an amicable settlement between the parties. The court allowed the compounding application and set aside the entire proceedings of the criminal case pending before the First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun.

Facts:

The petitioner and the informant were married on 20.04.1996. The informant alleged that she was harassed and tortured at her in-laws’ house, which led to her falling ill. An FIR was filed based on these allegations, and a subsequent investigation led to the filing of a charge-sheet against the petitioner under Sections 498-A (Cruelty to wife) and 506 (Criminal Intimidation) of the IPC.

The petitioner then approached the High Court seeking to quash the charge-sheet and the summoning order, citing a compromise between the parties. A joint compounding application supported by affidavits was also submitted before the court.

Issues:

• Whether the charge-sheet and the summoning order can be quashed based on an amicable settlement in a matrimonial dispute involving non-compoundable offenses.
• Whether the court should allow the continuation of proceedings when the parties have mutually agreed to settle and stay separate.

Petitioner’s Arguments:

The petitioner argued that since both parties had resolved their differences and had mutually decided to stay separate, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would serve no purpose. The petitioner emphasized that the matter was of a private nature and that the informant no longer intended to pursue the case.

Respondent’s Arguments:

The respondent supported the petitioner’s stance and verified the compromise. The informant appeared through video conferencing and confirmed before the court that she had voluntarily agreed to the settlement and did not wish to continue with the proceedings.

Analysis of the Law:

The court analyzed the nature of the offenses and considered the legal position concerning compounding of non-compoundable offenses. While generally, Section 498-A IPC is considered a serious non-compoundable offense, the courts have the discretion to quash proceedings if it serves the interests of justice and the parties have resolved their disputes amicably.

Precedent Analysis:

The court relied on precedents where proceedings were quashed in matrimonial disputes on the basis of settlements, citing that continuation of criminal cases in such situations often leads to further animosity rather than resolution.

Court’s Reasoning:

The court reasoned that when parties have amicably resolved their differences, insisting on continuation of the criminal trial would not serve any purpose and would merely prolong the suffering of both parties. Given that the informant confirmed the compromise, the court held that the petition should be allowed to prevent misuse of the criminal justice system.

Conclusion:

The High Court quashed the charge-sheet dated 20-08-2021, the summoning order dated 25.10.2021, and the entire proceedings of the case pending before the First Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun. The compounding application was accordingly disposed of.

Implications:

This decision underscores the court’s approach in matrimonial disputes where parties choose to settle amicably. It sets a precedent for quashing proceedings in similar cases, even when the charges are of a serious nature, provided the settlement is genuine and voluntarily made.

Also Read – Patna High Court: “Judicial Orders of Civil Courts Not Amenable to Writ Jurisdiction Under Article 226.” Directs Petitioners to Convert Writ Petition into Civil Miscellaneous Petition.