Long legal battle ‘worsens bitterness’, eats judicial time: Orissa High Court quashes dowry case

Justice Sanjeeb K Panigrahi noted that the aim and object of the legal system is not merely to punish the offender, but equally to preserve and promote peace.

The order added that in disputes arising out of matrimonial relationships, a pragmatic and humane approach is required, keeping in view the delicate nature of such relationships and their impact on the social fabric.

Decade-old case of alleged dowry harassment

• The matter arose from a 2016 complaint filed at the Udit Nagar Police Station.
• The complainant had alleged that her mother-in-law, brother-in-law, and sister-in-law, who is the petitioner, had brutally assaulted her, resulting in bleeding injuries.
• Consequently, charged were framed under Sections 489-A, 323, 354, 506, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
• During the pendency of the application, the parties informed the court that they had reached an amicable settlement facilitated by family members and “village gentries”.
• A joint affidavit filed before the Orissa High Court on April 7 revealed that the complainant is now residing separately from her husband and no longer wishes to proceed with the prosecution.
• The parties stated that continuing the criminal proceedings would cause them “irreparable loss and injuries”.
• Representing the state, additional standing counsel Raj Bhusan Dash submitted before the Orissa High Court that, considering the overall circumstances, and since the parties have amicably settled the matter amongst themselves and are no longer interested in supporting the prosecution, no useful purpose will be served in continuing with these proceedings.

‘Promote peace, tranquillity and harmony in society…’

• We are of the considered opinion that the aim and object of the legal system is not merely to punish the offender, but equally to preserve and promote peace, tranquillity and harmony in society, the Orissa High Court stated.
• The court is of the view that efforts ought to be made to encourage reconciliation and amicable settlement between the parties, to enable them to reflect upon their respective shortcomings and resolve their disputes through mutual consent.
• Looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, which has referred to several matters in this connection, the Orissa High Court noted that even a non-compoundable offence can be quashed based on a settlement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant.

• Similarly, in Narinder Singh and Others v. State of Punjab and Another, the Supreme Court held that when the parties have reached a settlement, and on that basis a petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure ends of justice, or to prevent abuse of the process of any court.
• In the case of B S Joshi and Others v State of Haryana and another, wherein the Supreme Court held that the special features in such matrimonial matters are evident, and it becomes the duty of the court to encourage genuine settlements of matrimonial disputes.