IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.43656 of 2013
Arising Out of PS.Case No. -87 Year- 2004 Thana -GAYA KOTWALI District- GAYA
Md. Zahid S/O Md. Zainul Hassan Resident Of Village- Ahijan, Police Station-
Athmal Gola, District- Pata.
…. …. Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State Of Bihar
2. Samira Khatoon D/O Abdul Hanan Resident Of Mohalla- 40, Rifle Range
Road, Kolkata- 19
…. …. Opposite Party/s
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ravindra Nath Dubey
For the Opposite Party/s : Dr. M.K. Gautam, APP
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SRIVASTAVA
C.A.V. JUDGMENT
Date: 18-07-2017
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner, by means of this application under section
482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has invoked the inherent
jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to quash the order dated
22.08.2008, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in Gaya
Kotwali P.S. Case No. 87 of 2004, whereby cognizance under section
498A, 307, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and sections 3/4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act has been taken against the petitioner.
Facts of the case, in short, is that the present first
information report was lodged by the informant against four named
accused persons including this petitioner, who is husband of the
informant. After investigation, police submitted final form
(Annexure-3) finding the case to be not true. On filing several
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43656 of 2013 dt.18-07-2017
2/3
applications by the informant, the case was reinvestigated. Witnesses
were produced and their statement under section 164 Cr. P.C.
(Annexure-4) was recorded. None of the witnesses supported the
prosecution case. Police again submitted the final form vide
Annexzure-5. Thereafter Magistrate took cognizance of the offence
as per impugned order. All the named accused persons except
petitioner came before this Court for quashing the order taking
cognizance by filing Cr. Misc. No. 46886 of 2008. This Court vide
order dated 25.07.2013 (Annexure-6) allowed the application and
quashed the entire proceedings including the order taking cognizance
dated 22.08.2013. Thereafter petitioner approached this Court by
filing the present quashing application. Vide order dated 26.04.2017,
the matter was referred to the Mediation Centre. Report of the
Mediation Centre is at Flag “Z”. Perusal whereof shows that the
matter has been compromised between the parties. Parties have filed
a joint compromise petition stating that they are living together since
one year. Joint compromise petition is attached with the Mediation
Report.
The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner
is that the matter has been compromised between the parties, and as
such prays for quashing of the entire proceedings as well as the order
taking cognizance.
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.43656 of 2013 dt.18-07-2017
3/3
From perusal of the materials available on record and
the submissions made above, it is evident that the matter has been
compromised between the parties and they are living together
happily. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh
Versus State of U.P. reported in (2012) 10 Supreme Court Cases
303 has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed
even in non-compoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its
extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in
case the justice so demands. According to the Hon’ble Supreme
Court, if the offence involve private dispute between the parties of
commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to a
heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.
In view of the above, the present application is allowed
and the entire proceeding including the order taking cognizance
dated 22.08.2008 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gaya in
Gaya Kotwali P.S. Case No. 87 of 2004 is, hereby, quashed.
The application accordingly stands allowed.
(Arvind Srivastava, J)
Manish/-
AFR/NAFR AFR
CAV DATE 11.07.2017
Uploading Date 19.07.2017
Transmission 19.07.2017
Date
