2016 (1) TMI 1503 - HC - Indian Laws

Seeking quashing of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question - dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved - offences under Sections 365,364A, 328,174A IPC are non-compoundable offences - HELD THAT - It is a well settled law that where the High Court is convinced that the offences are entirely personal in nature and therefore do not affect public peace or tranquillity and where it feels that quashing of such proceedings on account of compromise would bring about peace and would secure ends of justice, it should not hesitate to quash them. In such cases, pursuing prosecution would be waste of time and energy. Non-compoundable offences are basically an obstruction in entering into compromise. In certain cases, the main offence is compoundable but the connected offences are not. In the case of B.S. JOSHI ORS. VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA ANR. 2003 (3) TMI 721 - SUPREME COURT the Hon'ble Apex Court observed that even though the provisions of Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not apply to such offences which are not compoundable, it did not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Hon'ble Apex Court laid down that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. In the nutshell, the Hon'ble Apex Court justified the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice in view of the special facts and circumstances of the case, even where the offences were non- compoundable. This Court is of the view that notwithstanding the fact the offences under Sections 365,364A, 328,174A IPC are non-compoundable offences, there should be no impediment in quashing the FIR under these sections, if the Court is otherwise satisfied that the facts and circumstances of the case so warrant. In the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of statement made by the respondent No. 2, the FIR in question warrants to be put to an end and proceedings emanating thereupon need to be quashed - Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Quashing of FIR under Section 482 Cr.P.C based on settlement between parties.

Analysis:
1. The petitioners filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash FIR No. 70/2009 dated 07.09.2009, registered at Police Station Nabi Karim, based on a settlement with the respondent. The FIR was lodged by the respondent alleging kidnapping of her husband by the accused. The accused were declared Proclaimed Offenders as they were absent during proceedings.

2. The respondent confirmed in court that the disputes between the parties had been resolved amicably. She wrote to the SHO to stop the investigation based on the settlement. She affirmed the settlement in her affidavit, stating that she had no objection to quashing the FIR. The respondent's statement confirmed the compromise and resolution of all disputes with the petitioners.

3. The court referred to the principles laid down by the Apex Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab regarding quashing criminal proceedings based on settlements. The court noted that the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used sparingly and with caution, especially in cases involving serious offences. However, in cases with a predominantly civil character or arising from family disputes, quashing may be appropriate if the parties have settled their disputes.

4. The court held that the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be used to prevent the abuse of process of law and to secure the ends of justice. In this case, as the matter had been settled amicably and the respondent agreed to quash the FIR, continuing legal proceedings would cause extraordinary delay. Therefore, the court invoked its jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and end the proceedings.

5. The court emphasized that the inherent power should not be used to circumvent express provisions of law and should only be exercised when there is a risk of manifest injustice or abuse of the court process. Quashing proceedings in cases where offences are personal and do not affect public peace can bring about peace and secure justice. The court justified quashing non-compoundable offences under special circumstances to secure the ends of justice.

6. Considering the facts and the respondent's statement, the court concluded that quashing the FIR and proceedings was warranted. Therefore, the petition was allowed, and FIR No. 70/2009 under various sections of IPC was quashed against the petitioners. The petition was disposed of accordingly.