Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1625 - HC - Indian LawsSettlement of dispute through mediation - seizure of fake credit cards - HELD THAT - There is no bar to the disputant parties to be referred by the court to mediation, even in cases involving such non-compoundable offences the action in which context can be lawfully terminated by approaching the High Court under Section 482 Cr. PC, provided the parties are willing and there exists an element of settlement. After all, amicable settlement restores peace and tranquillity not only to the parties but also to the society at large. The concern to be addressed, however, is as to whether the court is to make a reference of a criminal case to the process of mediation merely for the asking or should there be scrutiny before such reference; and further as to whether the mediator is obliged to proceed ahead, hold parleys to negotiate and broker some settlement irrespective of the nature of offences only because there is a reference from the court. This Court is of the firm view that before making a reference to mediation in the context of criminal case, the court must consider as to whether a settlement reached by such effort would be acceptable for the criminal process to be brought to an end. The court while considering reference of the parties to a criminal case to mediation must before even ascertaining as to whether elements of settlement exist first examine, by preliminary scrutiny, the permissibility in law for the criminal action to be brought to an end either because the offence involved is compoundable or because the High Court would have no inhibition to quash it, bearing in mind the broad principles that govern the exercise of jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Issues Involved:
1. Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Based on Settlement. 2. Mediation in Cases Involving Serious Crimes. 3. Protracted Criminal Process and Delays. 4. Role and Responsibilities of Mediation Centers and Courts. Detailed Analysis: Quashing of Criminal Proceedings Based on Settlement: The court examined petitions invoking its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) to seek quashing of criminal proceedings due to settlements. The court emphasized that while settlements can be a basis for quashing proceedings, this is not applicable in cases involving heinous crimes or those affecting public interest. The court referenced the Supreme Court's ruling in Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Kurmur & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and Anr., which delineates the boundaries for quashing criminal proceedings, especially in cases involving serious crimes. Mediation in Cases Involving Serious Crimes: The court scrutinized whether mediation should be encouraged for settling disputes in cases involving serious crimes. It was noted that mediation is generally suitable for civil disputes or minor criminal offenses. However, in cases involving grave crimes such as rape, sexual assault, and significant financial frauds, mediation may not be appropriate. The court highlighted that such offenses have a broader impact on society and public interest, making them unsuitable for settlement through mediation. Protracted Criminal Process and Delays: The judgment revealed significant delays in the progress of criminal cases, particularly those involving credit card frauds. The court observed that these delays were due to various factors, including frequent transfers of the case files, absence of accused persons, and inefficiencies in the judicial process. The court criticized the handling of these cases, noting that the accused exploited procedural delays to their advantage. The court directed that these cases be given priority and handled on a day-to-day basis to ensure timely resolution. Role and Responsibilities of Mediation Centers and Courts: The court underscored the responsibilities of mediation centers and courts in handling criminal cases referred for mediation. It was stressed that before referring a criminal case to mediation, courts must preliminarily scrutinize the nature of the offense and the possibility of quashing the proceedings based on settlement. Mediation centers were advised to ensure that settlements reached are legally permissible and that they do not involve serious crimes that cannot be lawfully settled. The court suggested institutional mechanisms for vetting settlements in criminal cases to ensure consistency and adherence to legal standards. Conclusion: The court dismissed the petitions seeking quashing of criminal proceedings based on settlements in cases involving serious crimes, including credit card frauds and obscene calls. It emphasized the need for judicial prudence in referring criminal cases to mediation and the importance of timely and efficient handling of criminal trials. The judgment serves as a guideline for courts and mediation centers in dealing with criminal cases, ensuring that settlements do not undermine the seriousness of the offenses or public interest.
|