Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
CRL.M.C. 5412/2014
..... Respondents
Represented by: Mr. M.N. Dudeja, APP
for State.
Mr. Akshya Kr. Sharma, Adv. for R2 and
R3.
CORAM:
HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KAIT
SURESH KAIT, J. (Oral)
1.
that a quarrel had taken place between the parties for the reason that
respondent no. 2, Deendayal was having affairs with sister of
petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and daughter of petitioner nos. 4 and 5. In the
said quarrel, respondent nos. 2 and 3 received injuries. Due to
which, the aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioners.
Page 1 of 9
agreed to settle the matter. Both the respondents are present in the
Court and they have been identified by the IO concerned.
Respondent no. 2 submits that he has married Pushpa, sister of the
petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and daughter of petitioner nos. 4 and 5
respectively and they are living together as husband and wife. The
petitioners have become the brothers-in-law and parents-in-law of
respondent no. 2 and the respondent nos. 2 and 3 do not want to
pursue the case further against the petitioners.
4.
not
compoundable,
however,
considering
the
facts
and
Page 2 of 9
Court has power to accept the compromise. This issue has been
decided by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case
titled as Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 2
SCC (L&S)998, wherein held as under:
61....... the power of the High Court in quashing a
criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of
its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from
the power given to a criminal court for compounding
the offences Under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent
power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation
but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline
engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of
justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any
Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal
proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised
where the offender and victim have settled their dispute
would depend on the facts and circumstances of each
case and no category can be prescribed. However,
before exercise of such power, the High Court must
have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime.
Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or
offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be
fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's
family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such
offences are not private in nature and have serious
impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between
the victim and offender in relation to the offences
under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption
Act or the offences committed by public servants while
working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any
basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such
offences.
But
the
criminal
cases
having
overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil favour
stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing,
particularly the offences arising from commercial,
financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like
Page 3 of 9
the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr.
2014 6 SCC 466 wherein held as under:31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and
lay down the following principles by which the High
Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to
the settlement between the parties and exercising its
power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting
the settlement and quashing the proceedings or
refusing to accept the settlement with direction to
continue with the criminal proceedings:
Page 4 of 9
Page 5 of 9
Page 6 of 9
Page 7 of 9
that this case is at the initial stage and vide order dated 28.11.2014,
Police has already been directed not to take coercive action in this
matter. Moreover, respondent no. 2 has married with Pushpa, i.e.,
sister of petitioner nos. 1 to 3 and daughter of petitioner nos. 4 & 5.
Thus, both the parties have become close relatives.
9.
Page 8 of 9
SURESH KAIT, J.
JULY 02, 2015
jg/sb
Page 9 of 9