Labh Singh v. State Of Haryana And Others
! "
# $
% &'#&()*+,- ./+',+ #*#' 0',
',+ #*#' 0',1,
! "#$%& '( ) *+ ,* '" ,'-+*( ++.$/ 0 1 2 1 !"
" - * ,*,, 34 ,5
,
#$%1 " 6& ,
"
$1 " '
*+ ,* ' 1" 2 "7" (** 1 08 81
" ""
1
9 9 7 1
4 :
1 9
%!1
8"
"
;"
2" - * ,*,,34 ,5 1 ! "#$%1 ! " "
+
< #$% "
8 "" 1
1 "1" 7 " < ":9"
/
!
"# 4.
Per contra, learned State counsel has opposed the present petition and submitted that the offence under Section 304-A is not an offence in private. It is submitted that the offence committed is grave and serious in nature and the same do not fall within the ambit of compounding.
1 +*($/ 1 = /2
!
"3
1 45 1
!
2"3
1
'/4 "% 7"
5 2:/Baldev Singh vs. State of Punjab & anr., 2016(3) Law Herald 2020, +*($/
"
>
" "
#$%!1 "
"1
? "1" 2 1 1 " " 1 9 9
6.
The issue involved in the present case is that, can this Court under its power of inherent jurisdiction as enumerated under Section 528 of the BNSS, 2023 (erstwhile Section 482 Cr.P.C.) quash the proceedings under Section 304-A IPC on the basis of compromise arrived at between the accused and the complainant? @ +*($/ $ 1 1 7 "
7"
" +,*/ / 1 1 1 / 1 1/ 1! "
11 1/ 14 "1 >,):
&
! "#$%
= /2
8 3 5 1"
14 "/4 7 (
!
"3 1 495 99 = /
(I) Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution.
(II) When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.
While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. (III) Such a power is not be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender.
(IV) On the other, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
(V) While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases.
(VII) While deciding whether to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and even the charge sheet has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the High Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers favourably, but after prima facie assessment of the circumstances/material mentioned above.
On the other hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost complete or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at the stage of argument, normally the High Court should refrain from exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code, as in such cases the trial court would be in a position to decide the case finally on merits and to come a conclusion as to whether the offence under Section 307 IPC is committed or not.
7.
With regard to quashing the FIR for the offence under Section 306 IPC on the basis of compromise, Hon'ble Supreme Court in Daxaben's case (supra) has held as under:- "25. The only question in this appeal is whether the Criminal Miscellaneous Applications filed by the accused under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. could have been allowed and an FIR under Section 306 of the IPC for abetment to commit suicide, entailing punishment of imprisonment of ten years, could have been quashed on the basis of a settlement between the complainant and the accused named in the FIR. The answer to the aforesaid question cannot, but be in the negative.
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 37.
Offence under Section 306 of the IPC of abetment to commit suicide is a grave, non-compoundable offence. Of course, the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is wide and can even be exercised to quash criminal proceedings relating to non-compoundable offences, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of Court. Where the victim and offender have compromised disputes essentially civil and personal in nature, the High Court can exercise its power under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings. In what cases power to quash an FIR or a criminal complaint or criminal proceedings upon compromise can be exercised, would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. 38.
However, before exercising its power under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR, criminal complaint and/or criminal proceedings, the High Court, as observed above, has to be circumspect and have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous or serious crimes, which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the offender and the complainant and/or the victim. Crimes like murder, rape, burglary, dacoity and even abetment to commit suicide are neither private nor civil in nature. Such crimes are against the society. In no circumstances can prosecution be quashed on compromise, when the offence is serious and grave and falls within the ambit of crime against society.
39.
Orders quashing FIRs and/or complaints relating to grave and serious offences only on basis of an agreement with the
40.
In Criminal Jurisprudence, the position of the complainant is only that of the informant. Once an FIR and/or criminal complaint is lodged and a criminal case is started by the State, it becomes a matter between the State and the accused. The State has a duty to ensure that law and order is maintained in society. It is for the state to prosecute offenders. In case of grave and serious non- compoundable offences which impact society, the informant and/or complainant only has the right of hearing, to the extent of ensuring that justice is done by conviction and punishment of the offender. An informant has no right in law to withdraw the complaint of a non- compoundable offence of a grave, serious and/or heinous nature, which impacts society.
xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 50.
In our considered opinion, the Criminal Proceeding cannot be nipped in the bud by exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. only because there is a settlement, in this case a monetary settlement, between the accused and the complainant and other relatives of the deceased to the exclusion of the hapless widow of the deceased. As held by the three-Judge Bench of this Court in Laxmi Narayan & Ors. (supra), Section 307 of the IPC falls in the category of heinous and serious offences and are to be treated as crime against society and not against the individual alone. On a parity of reasoning, offence under Section 306 of the IPC would fall in the same category.
An FIR under Section 306 of the IPC cannot even be quashed on the basis of any financial settlement with the informant, surviving spouse, parents, children, guardians, care-givers or anyone else. It is clarified that it was not necessary for this Court to examine the question whether the FIR in this case discloses any offence under Section 306 of the IPC, since the High Court, in exercise of its power under Section 482 CrPC, quashed the proceedings on the sole ground that the disputes between the accused and the informant had been compromised."
8.
On reading the findings arrived by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it is deciphered that quashing FIRs and/or complaints relating to grave and serious offences only on basis of an agreement with the complainant, would
render otiose the provisions such as Sections 306, 498-A, 304B, 304A etc. incorporated in the IPC. Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that FIR registered for commission of the heinous/serious offences cannot be quashed on the basis of any financial settlement with the informant, surviving spouse, parents, children, guardians, care-givers or anyone else. Hon'ble Supreme Court, thus, has totally ruled out the quashing of the FIR for the heinous offences on the basis of the compromise. -
7 ! "#$%"
+*( 2:/* :!
8 4"% 5 1 " 9"
= / " A444 ,
? 11 / +,*/ / ! "
"41 (),/ /
$2
) 4"% 51 B /
! "
#
$ % & '
! "
#
$ "
& & %
! $%$ !& $'
% ! $!(
47%
5 +
$2
) 4"% 5!1 "
"! " +*'$/
+*'$/1 "
" "
"
1 "/1
+*'$/#$% "
$1 1 " +*'$/ $1 "/
(
$(
!
"3
,* (3,5% / % 3/ 5(),1 1
" +*'$/ (
#
$ %
) *
#
$ %
+, $ !-'.$ ! & $ $$ & $ & $ ! )) *
! $!) ! )
$'
$) !
$%
'
& $$ & $ #
!-'.$
"
/ >
7 +*( $/ 1 7"
1 81 +*( 1 $ 1
11 " 1 " .
C "1!
+*( "
B
/
"3 !
"
* ; / & >,*,* > 1 1 "
" +*( 7
$1 1"1 1 1 " 1 "
1 8 9 1 9
7 1 A D $ 1 8 E 1 4 1 9 " B /
" 1
8E 8
" +*( $/ $ "
1
1
'
$
:
!
# $ ,***3,5% / % 3/ 5 ) . B / 01
2
"
+ ! $'
& ,)
$ ! ! ! $
) -& !
) !) !
!,
$
.!) 0 3
' "
!+ 2'.$
+ . *2 "
45 !!!67$$, 0.
0 2
#
%
#
8
8
8
#
)
$ 1 4 +*( $ 9 C 6
"" ! " 71" 8 "
"1
"1 " 8
-
" "
" ! "
! "
" 1 18
7 1 " 1 9 7
1
""
E "6
B9 B
" 8 9 E" 7!
F 7 ! "
C" " 1 B
"
,*
7 / "1 1 "" " 1" 1 "
B"
;
/ " +>'3+5/ / "
"
" !
"" ! "! 7 / "1 1 "" " 1 " 1 " B"
; / " +>'
3+5/ / "
"
" ! 1
1"
"" ! "! ,
<81 1 " " +*'1 1 "" 9 $ +*(
7
"
"
" 7 ! " +*( 1 "
"
9 $"
6 " "
,,
1 1 "/ (),/ / 4
1
1 7 1 "9
1 8" " 8 ! "#$% +*( $/ % 1"
! " " +*( !" 1"
6 3 5
444D 7 9"
2: /* :!
8 )
1 " :/ 9"
<
7
=< !
"3
1/%
( (-.
,*,+,)
,*,(( 7 :
!
"3
/%
+ + ' ,*,(,- * ,*,( ";
>
= , =
"!
"3
1/%
(**+- ,*,( ,* *) ,*,( %
!
"3
1 /%
'>> ,*, * *) ,*,+ *
1 / = / 1
=2:/ 7/
&" 4 "
1" 9 1 4',+ #*#' 0',5 ,- 2+ '
C 8"6 G6& C G6&