Date of the Judgment: September 5, 2022
Citation: 2022 INSC 808
Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI and S. Ravindra Bhat, J.
Can a criminal case arising from a matrimonial dispute be quashed if the parties reach a settlement? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in an appeal concerning a First Information Report (FIR) lodged under Sections 323, 406, 498-A, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The Court allowed the appeal, quashing the criminal proceedings after the husband and wife reached a compromise. This judgment highlights the Court’s willingness to promote amicable resolutions in matrimonial disputes. The judgment was delivered by a bench comprising of Chief Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat.
Case Background
The case originated from a First Information Report (FIR) No. 55, dated February 14, 2016, registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana. The FIR was filed against the appellant-husband, Jasmair Singh, for offences punishable under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 406 (criminal breach of trust), 498-A (cruelty by husband or his relatives), and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The dispute arose from a matrimonial discord between the appellant and his wife, respondent no. 2.
Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| February 14, 2016 | First Information Report (FIR) No. 55 registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana. |
| December 23, 2021 | A Memo of Compromise was entered into between the appellant-husband and respondent no.2-wife. |
| April 7, 2022 | The High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dismissed CRM-M No.974 of 2022, which sought to quash the FIR. |
| September 5, 2022 | The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeal and quashed the FIR. |
Course of Proceedings
The appellant, seeking to quash the FIR based on the settlement, filed CRM-M No. 974 of 2022 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. The High Court rejected this request. The appellant then approached the Supreme Court of India, challenging the High Court’s decision.
Legal Framework
The case primarily involves Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which grants the High Court inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The Supreme Court also considered the precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which deals with the quashing of criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties.
The relevant legal provisions are:
- Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: “Saving of inherent powers of High Court. Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.”
The offences under which the FIR was lodged are:
- Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt.
- Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Punishment for criminal breach of trust.
- Section 498-A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Punishment for cruelty by husband or his relatives.
- Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860: Punishment for criminal intimidation.
Arguments
The appellant-husband argued that a settlement had been reached with the respondent-wife, and therefore, the criminal proceedings should be quashed. The appellant relied on the precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which allows for the quashing of criminal cases based on settlements, especially in cases arising from matrimonial disputes.
| Main Submission | Sub-Submission | Party |
|---|---|---|
| Settlement between parties | A compromise was reached between the husband and wife to settle all pending disputes. | Appellant (Husband) |
| Quashing of proceedings | The criminal proceedings should be quashed based on the settlement. | Appellant (Husband) |
| Reliance on precedent | The case is similar to Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, where the Supreme Court quashed proceedings based on a settlement. | Appellant (Husband) |
Issues Framed by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court did not explicitly frame any issues but considered the core question of whether the criminal proceedings could be quashed based on the settlement between the parties.
Treatment of the Issue by the Court
| Issue | Court’s Decision | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| Whether the criminal proceedings can be quashed based on the settlement between the parties? | Yes, the proceedings were quashed. | The Court noted that the parties had settled their dispute and wished to end the litigation. The Court relied on the precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303. |
Authorities
The Supreme Court relied on the following authority:
| Authority | Court | How it was used |
|---|---|---|
| Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 | Supreme Court of India | The Court followed this precedent, which allows for the quashing of criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties, especially in matrimonial disputes. |
Judgment
| Submission by Parties | Treatment by the Court |
|---|---|
| The parties had reached a settlement and wished to end the litigation. | The Court took the settlement on record and quashed the criminal proceedings. |
| Authority | How it was viewed by the Court |
|---|---|
| Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 | The Court relied on this case to justify quashing the proceedings, noting that it was a suitable case for exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. |
What weighed in the mind of the Court?
The Supreme Court’s decision was primarily influenced by the fact that the parties had reached a settlement and wished to end the litigation. The Court emphasized the need to promote amicable resolutions in matrimonial disputes. The Court also relied on the precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which allows for the quashing of criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties.
| Sentiment | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Settlement between parties | 60% |
| Precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab | 40% |
| Ratio | Percentage |
|---|---|
| Fact | 70% |
| Law | 30% |
The Court observed that “the parties have buried the hatchet and have decided to give quietus to the proceedings which were lodged inter se”. The Court found that the case was “eminently suitable to be considered for exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code”.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, took the settlement on record, and quashed the proceedings registered pursuant to First Information Report No. 55 dated 14.02.2016. The Court stated, “We, therefore, allow this appeal, take the settlement on record and quash the proceedings registered pursuant to First Information Report No.55 dated 14.02.2016 lodged with Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra, Haryana, in respect of offences punishable under Sections 323, 406, 498-A and 506 of the IPC.”
Key Takeaways
- ✓ Criminal proceedings arising from matrimonial disputes can be quashed if the parties reach a settlement.
- ✓ The Supreme Court is inclined to promote amicable resolutions in matrimonial disputes.
- ✓ Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, can be used to quash criminal proceedings in such cases.
- ✓ The precedent set in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, continues to be relevant in cases of settlement-based quashing of criminal proceedings.
Directions
No specific directions were given by the Supreme Court in this case.
Development of Law
The judgment reinforces the principle established in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, that criminal proceedings can be quashed based on a settlement between the parties, especially in matrimonial disputes. This case does not introduce a new position of law but rather applies the existing legal principle.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s decision in Jasmair Singh & Anr. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. highlights the importance of amicable settlements in matrimonial disputes. By quashing the criminal proceedings based on the compromise between the parties, the Court has reaffirmed its commitment to promoting peaceful resolutions and preventing unnecessary litigation. This judgment serves as a reminder that the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, can be used to secure the ends of justice and prevent abuse of the legal process.
Category
Parent Category: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Child Categories: Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Quashing of FIR, Matrimonial Disputes, Settlement, Inherent Powers of High Court
Parent Category: Indian Penal Code, 1860
Child Categories: Section 323, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 406, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 498A, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 506, Indian Penal Code, 1860
FAQ
Q: Can a criminal case be dismissed if the husband and wife reach a settlement?
A: Yes, the Supreme Court has stated that criminal cases arising from matrimonial disputes can be quashed if the parties reach a settlement. This is to promote amicable resolutions and prevent unnecessary litigation.
Q: What is Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973?
A: Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, grants the High Court inherent powers to prevent abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. This section can be used to quash criminal proceedings when a settlement has been reached between the parties.
Q: What was the key precedent in this case?
A: The key precedent was Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303, which allows for the quashing of criminal cases based on settlements, especially in cases arising from matrimonial disputes.
Q: What should I do if I have a criminal case against my spouse and we want to settle?
A: If you and your spouse have reached a settlement, you can approach the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to request the quashing of the criminal proceedings. It is advisable to consult a lawyer for proper legal guidance.
Q: What does it mean to “bury the hatchet” in legal terms?
A: In legal terms, “bury the hatchet” means that the parties have decided to end their disputes and reconcile. This often involves reaching a settlement and agreeing to discontinue legal proceedings.