Quashing of non-compounding case when parties are settled their issues out of the court

My wife has filed a false case against me to compel me for meeting her demand. She is not willing to live with me because she has an affair with a man and she wants to live with him. Her parents are also taking her favour therefore they demand a huge amount of money for mutual divorce. I was unable to fulfil their demand so that they started fighting and threatened me to face dire consequences. After some time, she approached me to return all the goods and money expended in her marriage. I denied returning a single penny because…

My wife has filed a false case against me to compel me for meeting her demand. She is not willing to live with me because she has an affair with a man and she wants to live with him. Her parents are also taking her favour therefore they demand a huge amount of money for mutual divorce.

I was unable to fulfil their demand so that they started fighting and threatened me to face dire consequences. After some time, she approached me to return all the goods and money expended in her marriage. I denied returning a single penny because it was unfair to demand.

Thereafter she filed a false case of cruelty and sodomy against me. We have settled our disputed consequently we want to get rid of criminal cases. My advocate says that sodomy is a non-compoundable offence, therefore, it cannot be compounded under section 320 crpc, please advise.

This criminal case is an undesirable consequence of the matrimonial dispute. Therefore if victim i.e. your wife is ready to withdraw this case to start a new life then the court may quash it under section 482 of the CrPC. The court will admit your petition irrespective of the fact that some offences are non-compoundable.

Section 482 of the code of criminal procedure confers wide power to the High Court. Generally, the court does not quash the non-compoundable offence because it gives the wrong signal in society. More serious offences are categorized as a non-compoundable offence because they affect society at large. Section 320 of the code of criminal procedure provides a list of compoundable offence. The offences not mentioned in the list are non-compoundable offence.

Since it is a false case and your wife is ready to withdraw then you should initiate a proceeding for quashing. Your petition is maintainable however sodomy is a non-compoundable offence. 

In Yogendra Yadav vs State of Jharkhand, (2014) 9 SCC 653; the Supreme Court has held that

"The High Court can quash a criminal proceeding in the exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code having regard to the fact that the parties have amicably settled their disputes and the victim has no objection, even though the offences are non-compoundable." 

The Supreme Court has reiterated the same decision in Gian Singh vs State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303. Above all where the alleged offence is wholly personal and does not affect the society then the court can quash the case in exercise of its power under Section 482 of the Code.

But in B.S. Joshi vs State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675; the supreme court has held that court can quash the criminal proceeding between parties to the marriage (husband-wife) if they have concluded that their marriage should be dissolved and a compromise deed has prepared by them to settle their issue out of the court.

The court can quash the criminal proceeding when there is no probability of conviction. A lame proceeding does not serve the interest of justice therefore any need to carry on that lame proceeding.

In Narinder Singh vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466; the High Courts accepted the compromise between the parties and quash the non-compoundable offence. When a victim has no objection to quash the proceeding then quashing becomes justified to:

  • Secure ends of justice, or
  • Prevent abuse of process of the court.

Therefore, in the interest of justice, the High Court can quash the proceeding if some non-compoundable offences are alleged therein. So in your case, you should file a petition before the High Court under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure for quashing of a criminal proceeding.

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Shivendra Pratap Singh

Advocate

Advocate Shivendra, practicing law since 2005, specializes in criminal and matrimonial cases, extensive litigatin experience before the High Court, Sessions court & Family Court. He established kanoonirai.com in 2014 to provide dependable and pragmatic legal support. Over the years, he has successfully assisted thousands of clients, making the platform a trusted resource for criminal and matrimonial dispute resolution in India.

Related Matters

Husband is demanding DNA test to check the paternity of our son in divorce case

The law does not permit a husband to compel his wife or child to undergo a DNA test merely on the basis of suspicion. In Gautam Kundu v. State of West Bengal (1993) 3 SCC 418, the Supreme Court held that a blood or DNA test cannot be directed as a matter of course. Before seeking such a direction, the husband must establish a strong prima facie case by proving that he had no access to his wife during the period when the child could have been conceived.

क्या चेक बाउंस का केस मियाद समाप्त होने के बाद भी दाखिल हो सकता है

Negotiable Instruments Act के अंतर्गत, वैधानिक अवधि समाप्त होने के बाद भी चेक बाउंस का मामला दायर किया जा सकता है। यदि शिकायतकर्ता देरी का उचित कारण प्रस्तुत करता है, तो न्यायालय विलंब को क्षमा कर शिकायत स्वीकार कर सकता है। नोटिस के बाद निर्धारित समय में भुगतान न होने पर कार्यवाही प्रारंभ की जा सकती है।

Cancellation of bail when accused tempering with witness

Seeking the cancellation of bail is possible when an accused person tampers with witnesses or influences a trial. This guide explains legal grounds for such actions, focusing on mandatory procedures under Section 15-A of the SC/ST Act and post-bail threats. Learn how victims can approach higher courts to ensure a fair trial and protect their rights.

Evidence of interested witness is admissible in criminal proceedings

In criminal law, the testimony of a related witness cannot be discarded solely due to their relationship with the victim. This legal overview clarifies the distinction between related and interested witnesses, citing key Supreme Court rulings. It explains how natural witnesses provide admissible evidence that reliably forms the basis for a conviction, even without independent corroboration.

SDM cannot attach property under section 146 crpc when civil suit is pending

A Sub-Divisional Magistrate cannot legally attach property under Section 146 of the CrPC if a civil suit regarding the same property is already pending. This guide explains why such orders lack jurisdiction and outlines the proper legal remedy, including filing a petition under Section 482 CrPC to the High Court based on established Supreme Court precedents.