2021 (9) TMI 1358 - SC - Indian Laws

Jurisdiction - power of a High Court to quash proceedings emanating from noncompoundable offences - offences having no impact or depraving effect on the society at large - HELD THAT - The offences which are noncompoundable cannot be compounded by a criminal court in purported exercise of its powers under Section 320 Cr.P.C. Any such attempt by the court would amount to alteration, addition and modification of Section 320 Cr.P.C, which is the exclusive domain of Legislature. There is no patent or latent ambiguity in the language of Section 320 Cr.P.C., which may justify its wider interpretation and include such offences in the docket of compoundable offences which have been consciously kept out as noncompoundable. Nevertheless, the limited jurisdiction to compound an offence within the framework of Section 320 Cr.P.C. is not an embargo against invoking inherent powers by the High Court vested in it under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The High Court, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case and for justifiable reasons can press Section 482 Cr.P.C. in aid to prevent abuse of the process of any Court and/or to secure the ends of justice. The High Court, therefore, having regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are noncompoundable. The High Court can indubitably evaluate the consequential effects of the offence beyond the body of an individual and thereafter adopt a pragmatic approach, to ensure that the felony, even if goes unpunished, does not tinker with or paralyze the very object of the administration of criminal justice system. The criminal proceedings involving nonheinous offences or where the offences are predominantly of a private nature, can be annulled irrespective of the fact that trial has already been concluded or appeal stands dismissed against conviction. Handing out punishment is not the sole form of delivering justice. Societal method of applying laws evenly is always subject to lawful exceptions - There can be no hard and fast line constricting the power of the High Court to do substantial justice. A restrictive construction of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. may lead to rigid or specious justice, which in the given facts and circumstances of a case, may rather lead to grave injustice. It is now a well crystalized axiom that the plenary jurisdiction of this Court to impart complete justice under Article 142 cannot ipso facto be limited or restricted by ordinary statutory provisions. It is also noteworthy that even in the absence of an express provision akin to Section 482 Cr.P.C. conferring powers on the Supreme Court to abrogate and set aside criminal proceedings, the jurisdiction exercisable under Article 142 of the Constitution embraces this Court with scopious powers to quash criminal proceedings also, so as to secure complete justice. In doing so, due regard must be given to the overarching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system, which is grounded on the sublime philosophy of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of placing an individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation. It is found appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and quash the criminal proceedings - all offences stand annulled - the Appellants shall be deemed to have been acquitted of the charged offences for all intents and purposes.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Compounding of non-compoundable offences under Section 326 IPC.
2. Invocation of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by High Courts.
3. Invocation of powers under Article 142 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Compounding of Non-Compoundable Offences Under Section 326 IPC:
The primary issue in both Criminal Appeals No. 1489 and No. 1488 of 2012 revolves around the compounding of non-compoundable offences under Section 326 IPC. The appellants in both cases sought the compounding of their offences based on settlements reached with the complainants. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. 1489, maintained that the offence under Section 326 IPC is non-compoundable and thus cannot be compounded, even though the parties had settled their dispute. The High Court of Karnataka, in Criminal Appeal No. 1488, did not consider the settlement as it was not presented before it.

2. Invocation of Inherent Powers Under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by High Courts:
The judgment elaborates on the inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings, even for non-compoundable offences, if it serves the ends of justice. The Supreme Court cited the principles laid down in the Gian Singh case, which clarified that the High Court could quash proceedings if the offence is of a private nature and the parties have settled their dispute. The Court emphasized that the nature and gravity of the offence must be considered, and heinous crimes or those affecting public policy cannot be quashed based on a compromise.

3. Invocation of Powers Under Article 142 of the Constitution by the Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court discussed its plenary powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice. It stated that these powers are not limited by statutory provisions like Section 320 Cr.P.C. and can be invoked to quash criminal proceedings to secure the ends of justice. The Court highlighted that this power should be exercised with caution, considering factors such as the nature of the offence, the voluntary nature of the compromise, and the conduct of the accused.

Analysis and Conclusion:
The Supreme Court analyzed the facts of both cases and concluded that the offences involved were of a private nature and did not exhibit mental depravity or serious public impact. The Court noted that the parties had voluntarily settled their disputes and that quashing the proceedings would promote peace and harmony. Therefore, the Court invoked its powers under Article 142 to quash the criminal proceedings and set aside the convictions in both appeals.

Criminal Appeal No. 1489 of 2012:
The Court quashed the criminal proceedings and set aside the judgments of the trial court, appellate court, and the High Court. The appellants were deemed to have been acquitted of all charges.

Criminal Appeal No. 1488 of 2012:
The Court directed the appellants and the complainant to submit their settlement in writing before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimoga, within three months. If a bona fide settlement is reported, the appeal will be disposed of similarly to Criminal Appeal No. 1489. If no settlement is submitted or the report is contrary, the appeal will be dismissed.

Disposition:
Both Criminal Appeals were disposed of in the terms outlined above, with the Supreme Court emphasizing the importance of securing the ends of justice through its inherent and constitutional powers.