Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2019 (4) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2019 (4) TMI 1625 - HC - Indian Laws


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.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates