B.S. Joshi & Ors vs. State of Haryana & Anr : Case Summary

B.S. Joshi & Ors vs State of Haryana & Anr

Author : Darshi Sanghvi

BENCH

Y.K. Sabharwal, H.K. Sema

INTRODUCTION

Since time immemorial, marriage is regarded as a sacred ceremony that binds two people together such that they settle down and live happily ever after. However, sometimes as a result of minor disputes, the wife tends to file complaints and upon the resolution of the matter, the parties jointly pray for the quashing of the criminal proceedings/ FIR. The present case of B.S. Joshi & Ors vs State of Haryana & Anr Seeks to determine whether the High Court has the power to quash criminal proceedings/ FIR/ complaints.

FACTS

Appellant no. 4 (husband) and Respondent no. 2 (wife) got married on 21st July 1999 and began living separately since 15th July 2000. The wife filed an affidavit stating that the FIR was registered under  Section 498A/323 and 406 IPC at her request, on grounds of temperamental differences and implied imputations.

As per the affidavit, her disputes with the appellants had been resolved and she and Appellant no. 4 had consented for mutual divorce. On filing the petition for the same, statements on first motion were recorded on 18th July, 2002 and 2nd September, 2002 respectively.

Additionally, the statements with regard to the second petition were recorded by on 13th September, 2002.

The Counsel for respondent No.2 supports the said appeal and also suggests the quashing of the FIR. Nonetheless, the State has expressed strong opposition regarding the same.

The HC considers the offences under Section 498 A and 406 IPC to be non-compoundable and states that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code cannot be called on to bypass the mandatory provision provided under Section 320 of the Code.

In light of the aforementioned views, the HC, through the impugned judgement, dismisses the appeal regarding the quashing of the FIR.

ISSUES AND FACTS OF LAW

Whether the HC has the power to quash criminal proceedings under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (Code) read with Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India.

Whether the offences under Section 498 A and 406 IPC are non-compoundable.

Whether a non-compoundable offence can be compounded.

JUDGEMENT

The HC has lost sight of the fact that the seven categories mentioned in Bhajan Lal’s case regarding the exercise of the extraordinary power under Article 226 or the inherent power under Section 482, is inexhaustive.  

There has been a misreading and misapplication by the HC of the decision given in Madhu Limaye’s case. The aforementioned case does not throw light on any general proposition limiting power of quashing the FIR/ criminal proceedings/ complaint.

If quashing of FIR becomes mandatory in order to secure the ends of justice, then Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of such a power. However, whether to exercise such a power or not depends upon the facts and circumstances of the case.

In case the wife does not support the imputations and no conviction exists, it would be improper to decline to exercise power of quashing based on the fact that it would be permitting the parties to compound non-compoundable offences.

It is likely that the non-exercise of the power of quashing proceedings in order to meet the ends of justice would restrict a woman from settling earlier, which is undoubtedly not the object of Chapter XXA of the IPC.

In light of the aforementioned facts, it is held that the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers is permitted to quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint. Furthermore, Section 320 of the Code does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code. The impugned judgment is thus set aside, the appeal is allowed and the aforementioned FIR is quashed herewith.