B.S. JOSHI AND ORS. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

Citation: [2003] 2 S.C.R. 1104 · Decided: 13-03-2003 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: Y.K. SABHARWAL · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Cited by 3 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
B.S. JOSHI AND ORS. 
V. 
STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR. 
MARCH 13, 2003 
[Y.K. SABHARWAL AND H.K. SEMA, JJ.] 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973-Sections 482 and 320-Quashing 
of criminal proceeding/FIR/complaint-Scope and ambit of in relation to 
C matrimonial disputes-Held: When chances of conviction of accused are bleak 
and quashing of the proceedings is to secure justice, High Court in exercise 
of its inherent powers can quash FIR for offences under section which are 
non-compoundable and Section 320 does not limit or bar the powers of 
quashing-Penal Code, 1860 Sections 498A, 323 and 406. 
D 
Penal Code, 1860-Chapter Y.X-A, Section 498A-Object of-Discussed. 
Respondent No.2 registered an FIR under Sections 498A/323 and 406 
IPC against appellant No.4-her husband. Thereafter parties settled their 
disputes. Appellants filed petition for quashing of FIR. High Court 
dismissed the petition as the offences under Sections 498A and 406 IPC 
E are non-compoundable and the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. 
cannot be invoked to by pass mandatory provision of Section 320 Cr.P.C . 
. Hence the present appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
F 
HELD 1.1 If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing 
of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to_ the 
exercise of power of quashing under Section 482 of the Code. Therefore 
the High Court in exercise of its inherent powers can quash criminal 
proceedings or FIR or complaint. It is, however, a different matter 
G depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to 
exercise or not such a power. ill09-D, E] 
H 
1.2. Where the chances of an ultimate conviction is bleak, and no 
useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to 
continue, the court may, while taking into consideration the special facts 
1104 
--
-
B.S. JOSHI v. STATE OF HARYANA 
1105 
of a case, also quash the proceedings. In the instant case, wife has filed an A 
affidavit that the FIR was registered at h 
instance due to temperamental 
differences and implied imputations. There niay be many reasons for not 
supporting the imputations. It may be either for the reason that she has 
resolved disputes with her husband and his other family members and as 
a result thereof she has again started living with her husband with whom B 
she earlier had difference or she has willingly parted company and is living 
happily on her own or has married someone else or earlier marriage 
having been dissolved by divorce on consent of parties or fails to support 
the prosecution on some other similar grounds. In such eventuality, there 
would almost be no chance of the accused being convicted of the offence. 
Thus, it would not be proper to decline to exercise power of quashing on C 
the ground that it would "be permitting the parties to compound non-
compoundable offences. It would, however, be a different matter if the 
High Court on facts declines the prayer for quashing for any valid reasons 
including lack of bona fides. 11110-D-H] 
1.3. The special features in matrimonial mattes are evident. It D 
becomes the duty of the Court to encourage genuine settlements of 
matrimonial disputes. IJ 111-8] 
1.4. The object of introducing Chapter XX-A containing Section 
498A in the Penal Code was to prevent the torture to a woman by her E 
husband or by relative of her husband. Section 498A was added with a 
view to punishing a husband and his relatives who harass or torture the 
wife to coerce her or her relatives to satisfy unlawful demands of dowr.y. 
The hyper-technical view would be counter productive and would act 
against interests of women and against the object for which this provision 
was added. There is every likelihood· that non-exercise of inherent power F 
to quash the proceedings to meet the ends of justice would prevent women 
from settling earlier. That is not the object of Chapter XXA of the Penal 
Code. 11111-F, GI 
State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors., 119921Supp.1 SCC 
335; Surandra Nath Mohanty and Anr. v. State ofOrissa, AIR (1999) SC G 
2181; Pepsi Food Ltd and Anr. v. Special Judicial Magistrate and Ors., 11998] 
5 SCC 749; State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy and Ors., 11977] 2 SCC 
699; Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia and Ors. v. Sambhajirao Chandrajirao 
Angre and Ors., 11988] l SCC 692; G.V. Rao v. L.H.V Prasad and Ors., 
12000] 3 SCC 693 and Madhu Limaya v. The State of Maharashtra, 119771 4 H 
1106 
SUPREME COURT
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.