Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Dharampal Singh Jadon vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 March, 2023
Bench: Surya Kant, J.K. Maheshwari
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.887/2023
(@Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6843/2022)
DHARAMPAL SINGH JADON & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. Respondent(s)
O R D E R
Leave granted.
2. The appellants are aggrieved by the impugned order dated 02022022 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior, whereby their petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short, “CrPC”) for quashing the FIR registered in Crime No.451/2016 at Maharajpura Police Station, Gwalior for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 498A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, “IPC”) and all the proceed ings arising therefrom, has been dismissed. The High Court has opined that since the offences punishable under Sections 307, 498A, and 34 IPC are noncompoundable under Section 320 Cr.PC., the power conferred under Section 482 Cr.PC. to quash the criminal proceed ings cannot be exercised.
3. Before we advert to the subsequent events, the facts may be briefly noticed.
Signature Not VerifiedDigitally signed by VISHAL ANAND
4. Date: 2023.03.28 13:11:17 IST Reason: The Appellant Nos.2 and 3 are parents of Appellant No.1, whereas Appellant No.4 is the sister of Appellant No.1.
5. The marriage between Appellant No.1 and Respondent No.2 – com plainant was solemnized on 12072016.
6. The marital ties between Appellant No.1 and Respondent No.2 could not run smoothly, and hardly after five months, Respondent No.2 made a complaint on 12122016 alleging that Appellant Nos.1, 3, and 4 tried to kill her by strangulating from her dupatta, and Appellant No.2 allegedly shouted not to leave her and kill her. The said complaint led to registration of FIR No.451/2016 on 13122016 under Sections 307/498A and 34 IPC. After completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed on 14062017 and the appellants are facing trial pursuant thereto.
7. The parties eventually resolved their matrimonial disputes and entered into a Settlement in the year 2021, whereby they resolved to obtain a decree of divorce by mutual consent and put an end to all the pending litigations. Under the settlement, Respondent No.2 was paid permanent alimony of Rs.15,84,000/.
8. Appellant No.1 and Respondent No.2 thereafter filed a joint petition under Section 13(B) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 before the Family Court, Gwalior, and a decree of divorce by mutual con sent was granted to them on 30082022.
9. Even before the grant of divorce by mutual consent, the appel lants filed a petition before the High Court under Section 482 Cr.PC. for quashing the abovestated FIR and the proceedings arising therefrom. Vide the impugned order, the High Court, as noticed at the outset, declined to quash the criminal proceedings.
10. With a view to ascertain the genuineness of the settlement of the matrimonial disputes, Respondent No.2 – complainant was asked to appear inperson before this Court. Consequently, she appeared on 30092022 and made the following statement on oath: I, Seema Jadon @ Seema Tomar, daughter of Shri Narender Singh Tomar, respondent No.2/complainant, resident of Hills View Colony, D.D. Nagar, Maharajpura, District Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh do hereby solemnly affirm and declare as under: “1. That my marriage was solemnized with petitioner No.1 on 12.07.2016 and, thereafter, dispute and differences arose between us and since 12.12.2016, I am living separately from petitioner No.1 – Dharampal Singh Jadon.
2. However, with the intervention of the wellwishers, the parties have entered into a settlement without any fear, force or coercion in the year 2021 and all the claims qua streedhan and alimony are settled and have been paid to me by petitioner No.1.
3. Pursuant to the settlement, a decree of divorce by way of mutual consent has been granted by the Principal Judge, Family Court, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh on 30.08.2022, and nothing remains disputed and I have no objection if the FIR in question filed against the petitioners is quashed by this Hon’ble Court.”
11. It may be seen that Respondent No.2 has categorically deposed that the settlement was entered into without any fear, force, or coercion and that all her claims have been duly settled by the first Appellant. She further deposed that the marriage between the parties has been dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent and that she has no objection if the FIR in question is quashed by this Court.
12. Learned counsel for the parties have further informed that Re spondent No.2 has meanwhile remarried and is now settled in Oman.
13. Learned counsel for Respondent No.2 reiterates the statement made by her before this Court on 30092022 and supports the appellants’ prayer for quashing of the criminal proceedings in the light of the subsequent events that have taken place.
14. Learned counsel for the State, of course, submits that trial is going on and some of the witnesses have been already examined.
15. Ordinarily, the High Court or this Court would be reluctant to quash the proceedings in relation to a heinous offence like Section 307 IPC, as such offences are held to have been committed not against an individual but the society at large.
16. However, this is a case where genesis of the subject – FIR is admittedly a matrimonial dispute between the first appellant and Respondent No.2. The said dispute has been amicably resolved, and the parties have parted ways through a mutual settlement. Respon dent No.2 has unequivocally deposed before this Court that the im pugned criminal proceedings against the appellants may be quashed. She is now happily settled in her new married life.
17. In these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it appears to us that continuation of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility, and the cause of administration of criminal justice system would hardly be served by subjecting the appellants to face the trial.
18. It further appears to us that the pendency of the criminal trial would also cause indirect harassment to Respondent No.2 as well, as every date of hearing would per force revive her trauma tised past.
19. Taking into consideration the totality of the peculiar facts and circumstances and on the joint request of the parties, we find it a fit case to invoke our power under Article 142 of the Consti tution and quash the FIR No.451/2016 for the offences punishable under Sections 307, 498A and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) reg istered at Maharajpura Police Station, Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, and all the proceedings arising therefrom, including the proceedings in Sessions Case No.286/2017 pending before the 6 th Additional Sessions Judge, District Gwalior, M.P.
20. Ordered accordingly.
21. The appeal is disposed of in aboveterms.
…………………………………J (SURYA KANT) …………………………………………J (J.K. MAHESHWARI) NEW DELHI 21ST MARCH,2023.
ITEM NO.19 COURT NO.9 SECTION IIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6843/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 02022022 in MCRC No. 56371/2021 passed by the High Court of M.P. at Gwalior) DHARAMPAL SINGH JADON & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR. Respondent(s) (IA No. 102408/2022 EXEMPTION FROM FILING C/C OF THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT, IA No. 145067/2022 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. & IA No. 102410/2022 EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.) Date : 21032023 This matter was called on for hearing today. CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE J.K. MAHESHWARI For Petitioner(s) Mr. Arunabh Choudhary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ravi Bhushan, AOR Mr. Anirudh Mahadevan Sethi, Adv. Mr. Dechenw Lachungpa, Adv. Mr. Siddharth Verma, Adv. For Respondent(s) Mr. Gopal Jha, AOR Mr. Arushi, Adv.
Mr. Baijnath Patel, Adv. Ms. Keshari Tempe, Adv. Mr. Sanket, Adv.
Mr. Rahul Pratap, AOR UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is disposed of, in terms of the signed Order.
Pending applications also stand disposed of.
(VISHAL ANAND) (KAMLESH RAWAT)
ASTT. REGISTRARcumPS ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
(Signed Order is placed on the file)