BINOD KUMAR GUPTA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners are the husband, father -in -law, mother -in -law and the brother -in -law of the de facto complainant, the opposite party no. 2 herein. They have moved this criminal revision invoking section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of the charge sheet relating to the offences punishable under sections 498A/406/34 IPC on the ground that all the disputes gave rise to the aforesaid case has now been compromised out of court by and between the parties.

(2.) IN connection with this criminal revisional application, a joint compromise petition has been filed. It is an admitted position the offences involved are arising out of purely matrimonial disputes and private in nature. Now the parties have settled their disputes out of court and all the stridhan articles have been received back by the de facto complainant/wife and already they have filed an application before a competent court for dissolution of their marriage on mutual consent and long before the de facto complainant by addressing a letter to the officer -in - charge of the concerned police station expressed his willingness not to proceed any further with the impugned proceedings. Both the counsels appearing for the parties urged for quashing of the impugned proceeding on the ground of compromise.

(3.) HAVING regard to the fact that the case in question is purely private in nature and arising out of matrimonial dispute by and between the parties and when already the wife had received back all her stridhan articles and the husband and wife have moved a competent court seeking dissolution of their marriage on mutual consent and the de facto complainant/wife, at whose behest the criminal law was set into motion an outcome whereof is the impugned criminal proceeding, is no longer desirous to proceed with this criminal proceeding, there is no chance of the same to reach to its logical conclusion. Therefore, keeping the proceedings pending any further would only amount to mere abuse of process of court and ends of justice demand the impugned proceeding be quashed. It may be noted this is not one of such case which according to the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Gian Singh versus the State of Punjab, 2013 1 SCC(Cri) 160, that even if the victim or family members of the victim and offender have settled their dispute out of court, still the quashing is not permissible, since the offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society.