Partial compromises excluding some accused or victims were held insufficient for piecemeal quashing of criminal proceedings. The court answered the reference by directing courts to reject piecemeal settlements and refrain from corresponding orders of composition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-1-
In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
| 1. | CRM-M No. 48043 of 2023 (O&M) Reserved on: 22.10.2024 Date of Decision: 12.11.2024 |
|---|---|
| Rakesh Das | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Haryana and another | ......Respondents |
| 2. | CRM-M No. 2964 of 2021 (O&M) |
| Asha Rani | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 3. | CRM-M No. 45618 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Baljit Singh Walia @ Baljit Singh | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 4. | CRM-M No. 46322 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Kuldip Singh | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and others | ......Respondents |
| 5. | CRM-M No. 58552 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Mayank Rana and others | ......Petitioners |
| Versus | |
| State of Haryana and others | ......Respondents |
| 6. | CRM-M No. 2018 of 2024 (O&M) |
| Himanshu Verma | ......Petitioner Versus |
| State of Haryana and another | ......Respondents |
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
| CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases |
-2- |
|---|---|
| 7. Jatin Paul Singh @ Jatin Pal Sin State of Haryana and another |
CRM-M No. 2030 of 2024 (O&M) gh ......Petitioner Versus ......Respondents |
| 8. | CRM-M No. 24539 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Vishal Bhandari alias Bobby and others |
......Petitioners |
| State of Haryana and others | Versus ......Respondents |
| 9. | CRM-M No. 31323 of 2021 (O&M) |
| Rahul Kumar @ Rahul | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Haryana and another | ......Respondents |
| 10. | CRM-M No. 32447 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Vinay Kumar and another | ......Petitioners |
| Versus | |
| State of Haryana and another | ......Respondents |
| 11. | CRM-M No. 35062 of 2021 (O&M) |
| Dial Singh and others | ......Petitioners |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 12. | CRM-M No. 44731 of 2022 (O&M) |
| Balwinder Singh @ Nikka and | others ......Petitioners |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 13. | CRM-M No. 44445 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Gautam Arora | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and others Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh |
......Respondents |
| CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases |
-3- |
|---|---|
| 14. | CRM-M No. 44474 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Puneet Kumar @ Punit Kumar State of Haryana and another |
......Petitioner Versus ......Respondents |
| 15. | CRM-M No. 44740 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Kamal @ Lalluwala | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 16. | CRM-M No. 50448 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Gurpal Singh @ Pali | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 17. | CRM-M No. 51717 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Taranjit Singh | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 18. | CRM-M No. 52849 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Shams Parvaize | ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and another | ......Respondents |
| 19. | CRM-M No. 5503 of 2024 (O&M) |
| Amit Bhandari and another | ......Petitioners |
| Versus | |
| State of Haryana and another | ......Respondents |
| 20. | CRM-M No. 55217 of 2023 (O&M) |
| Rajvir Singh @ Rajveer Singh @ and others |
Moli ......Petitioner |
| Versus | |
| State of Punjab and others Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh |
......Respondents |
CRM-M-48043-2023 -4other connected cases 21. CRM-M No. 55726 of 2023 (O&M) Sarbjot Singh @ Sukhwinder Singh ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents 22. CRM-M No. 55881 of 2023 (O&M) Shubham and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents 23. CRM-M No. 56332 of 2023 (O&M) Amit @ Kali and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others ......Respondents 24. CRM-M No. 59610 of 2023 (O&M) Hashim Favaz C and another ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ......Respondents 25. CRM-M No. 6003 of 2024 (O&M) Upender Maheshwari ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another ......Respondents 26. CRM-M No. 6185 of 2024 (O&M) Kushank ......Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and another .....Respondents 27. CRM-M No. 65205 of 2023 (O&M) Mahavir and another ......Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ......Respondents 28. CRM-M No. 58966 of 2023 (O&M) Yogesh Rana ......Petitioner Versus The State of Haryana and another ......Respondents
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -5other connected cases 29. CRM-M No. 58868 of 2023 (O&M) Mandeep Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents 30. CRM-M No. 32863 of 2021 (O&M) Satnam Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents 31. CRM-M No. 43328 of 2022 (O&M) Arwinder Singh and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents 32. CRM-M No. 53780 of 2023 (O&M) Badal Singh @ Gabbar Singh ...…Petitioners and another Versus State of Punjab and others ......Respondents 33. CRM-M No. 52223 of 2023 (O&M) Des Raj Rattu ......Petitioner Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents 34. CRM-M No. 55877 of 2023 (O&M) Veena Soni and others ......Petitioners Versus State of Punjab and another ......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESHWAR THAKUR HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUDEEPTI SHARMA
Argued by : Mr. P.S. Ahluwalia, Advocate ( amicus Curiae ) with Mr. Raunaq Singh Aulakh, Advocate for the petitioner(s). Mr. D.S. Matya, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-6185-2024). Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Gurmail Singh Duhan, Advocate
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-6-
for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-55877-2023).
Mr. Himanshu Choudhary, Advocate for Mr. Govind Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-58966-2023).
Mr. P.P.S. Duggal, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-53780-2023).
Mr. K.S. Dadwal, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-44445-2023).
Mr. Himanshu Choudhary, Advocate for Mr. Viney Saini, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-24539-2023).
Mr. Harparteek Singh Sandhu, Advocate and Mr. Harsh Vasu Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-48043-2023).
Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for Mr. Vishal Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-45618-2023).
Mr. Ramnish Puri, Advocate & Ms. Monika Tanwar, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-31323-2021).
Mr. Sukhdeep Singh, Advocate and Mr. Puneet Kapoor, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-52849-2023).
Mr. Inderpal Singh, Advocate for Ms. Puja Chopra, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-46322-2023).
Mr. Vimal Kumar Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-5503-2024).
Mr. R.S. Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner(s) (in CRM-M-58868-2023).
Mr. Ankur Mittal, Additional A.G. Haryana and Mr. Pradeep Prakash Chahar, Sr. DAG, Haryana Mr. Saurabh Mago, D.A.G Ms. Kushaldeep Kaur, Advocate Ms. Saanvi Singla, Advocate for the respondent -State.
Mr. Maninderjit Singh Bedi, Addl. A.G. Punjab and Mr. Maninder Singh, Sr. DAG, Punjab.
Mr. Akhil Sharma, Advocate
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-7-
for the complainant (in CRM-M-31323-2021).
Mr. Brahmjot Singh Nahar, Advocate for respondent No. 2 (in CRM-M-48043-2023).
Mr. Arav Gupta, Advocate for respondent in (CRM-M-6185-2024).
Mr. Rajesh Chaudhary, Advocate for Mr. Gurmail Singh Duhan, Advocate for the respondent/complainant (in CRM-M-56332-2023).
Ms. Gurpreet Kaur, Advocate for respondent No.2 (in CRM-M-58868-2023).
SURESHWAR THAKUR, J.
“25. Moreover, this Court has also examined the judgments cited by the learned amicus curiae, details whereof are tabularized hereinafter. In some of these judgments, the Coordinate Benches of this Court have allowed partial quashing of FIR, on the basis of partial compromise, whereas, in some of these judgments, the said relief has been declined.
“Judgments wherein partial quashing has been allowed.
| _S.No. _ | Case Title | Citation | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Harvinder Singh and Ors. V. State of Haryana and Anr. |
2022 OnLine 3114 |
SCC P&H |
03.11.2022 |
| 2. | Sarabjeet Singh V. State of Punjab |
2007 (3) (Criminal) |
RCR 479 |
01.05.2007 |
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
-8-
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
| 3. | Gurtej Singh V. State Haryana |
of 2010 (3) RCR (Criminal) 660 |
26.03.2010 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 4. | Joginder Singh and Anr. State of Punjab and Anr. |
V. CRM-M-23739- 2010 |
27.04.2011 |
| 5. | Baldev Singh and Anr. State of Punjab and Anr. |
V. CRM-M-46037- 2021 |
04.04.2022 |
| 6. | Malak Singh V. State Punjab |
of CRM-M-8999- 2020 |
09.02.2023 |
| 7. | Harsimran Singh V. State Punjab |
of CRM-M-14035- 2022 CRM-M-6962- 2020 |
24.04.2022 |
| 8. | Parambir Singh Gill Malkiat Kaur |
V. (2010) 1 RCR (Criminal) 256 |
12.05.2009 |
Judgments wherein partial quashing has been declined.
| S.No . 1. |
Case Title Manohar Singh Manohari V. State of Punjab |
Citation CRM-M-36765- 2011 |
Date 27.11.2012 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2. | Manjinder Kaur V. State of Punjab |
CRM-M-32486- 2015 |
25.07.2017 |
| 3. | Navdeep Kumar and Anr. V. State of Haryana and Anr. |
CRM-M-42254- 2013 |
12.11.2014 |
26. In summa, when there are no explicit guidelines/“ratio decidendi”/“legal precedent” governing the issue of partial quashing of criminal proceedings, on the basis of partial compromise, coupled with the fact that conflicting views are adopted by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, in the hereinabove cited judgments, this Court deems it fit and appropriate to refer the following issues for adjudication to a Larger Bench of this Court:-
“(i) Whether, bearing in mind the repercussions attached to partial quashing of FIR, on the trial of other co-accused, can a partial compromise yet ably constitute the ground for quashing of FIR, only qua some of the accused ?
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -9other connected cases
(ii) Would partial quashing of criminal proceedings, on the strength of partial compromise, elevate the status of victim from that of a stakeholder to that of a driver of the criminal justice system?”
“4. According to us, the F.I.R. in question filed against the appellants – herein by Respondent No.2 is only an after-thought with the sole intention to pressurize the appellants not to prosecute their Criminal Complaint filed by them under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -10other connected cases
5. Accordingly, we find that the order so passed by the High Court is not sustainable in the eyes of law and deserves to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, we set aside the said order of the High Court and quash the F.I.R. qua the appellants – herein. The appeal is allowed in the afore-stated terms.”
to become also bolstered from a judgment rendered by the Apex Court in
case titled as Jayrajsingh Digvijay Singh Rana versus State of Gujarat and another , reported in 2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 589 , whereins, in the relevant paragraphs thereof, paragraphs whereof become extracted hereinafter, the hereinafter relevant principles become echoed-
“8. The above question was recently considered by this Court in Shiji @ Pappu & Ors. v. Radhika & Anr., 2011(6) Recent Apex Judgments (R.A.J.) 210 : 2012(1) RCR (Criminal) 9 : (2011)10 SCC 705. The question posed in that case was "Whether the criminal proceedings in question could be quashed in the facts and circumstances of the case having regard to the settlement that the parties had arrived at." After adverting to section 482 of the Code and various decisions, this Court concluded as under :
"17. It is manifest that simply because an offence is not compoundable under Section 320 Criminal Procedure Code is by itself no reason for the High Court to refuse exercise of its power under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code. That power can in our opinion be exercised in cases where there is no chance of recording a conviction against the accused and the entire exercise of a trial is destined to be an exercise in futility. There is a subtle distinction between compounding of offences by the parties before the trial court or in appeal on the one hand and the exercise of power by the High Court to quash the prosecution under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code on the other. While a court trying an accused or hearing an appeal against conviction, may not be competent to permit compounding of an offence based on a settlement arrived at between the parties in cases where the offences are not compoundable under Section 320, the High Court may
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-11-
quash the prosecution even in cases where the offences with which the accused stand charged are non-compoundable. The inherent powers of the High Court under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code are not for that purpose controlled by Section 320 Criminal Procedure Code.
18. Having said so, we must hasten to add that the plenitude of the power under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code by itself, makes it obligatory for the High Court to exercise the same with utmost care and caution. The width and the nature of the power itself demands that its exercise is sparing and only in cases where the High Court is, for reasons to be recorded, of the clear view that continuance of the prosecution would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law. It is neither necessary nor proper for us to enumerate the situations in which the exercise of power under Section 482 may be justified. All that we need to say is that the exercise of power must be for securing the ends of justice and only in cases where refusal to exercise that power may result in the abuse of the process of law. The High Court may be justified in declining interference if it is called upon to appreciate evidence for it cannot assume the role of an appellate court while dealing with a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. Subject to the above, the High Court will have to consider the facts and circumstances of each case to determine whether it is a fit case in which the inherent powers may be invoked."
9. On going through the factual details, earlier decision, various offences under Section 320 of the Code and invocation of section 482 of the Code, we fully concur with the said conclusion. In the case on hand, irrespective of the earlier dispute between Respondent No. 2-the complainant and the appellant being Accused No. 3 as well as Accused Nos. 1 and 2 subsequently and after getting all the materials, relevant details etc., the present appellant (Accused No. 3) sworn an affidavit with bona fide intention securing the right, title and interest in favour of Respondent No. 2 herein-the Complainant. In such bona fide circumstances, the power under Section 482 may be exercised. Further, in view of the settlement
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-12-
arrived at between Respondent No. 2-the complainant and the appellant (Accused No. 3), there is no chance of recording a conviction insofar as the present appellant is concerned and the entire exercise of trial is destined to be an exercise in futility. Inasmuch as the matter has not reached the stage of trial, we are of the view that the High Court, by exercising the inherent power under section 482 of the Code even in offences which are not compoundable under Section 320, may quash the prosecution. However, as observed in Shiji (supra), the power under Section 482 has to be exercised sparingly and only in cases where the High Court is, for reasons to be recorded, of the clear view that continuance of the prosecution would be nothing but an abuse of the process of law. In other words, the exercise of power must be for securing the ends of justice and only in cases where refusal to exercise that power may result in the abuse of the process of law.
10. In the light of the principles mentioned above, inasmuch as Respondent No. 2-the Complainant has filed an affidavit highlighting the stand taken by the appellant (Accused No. 3) during the pendency of the appeal before this Court and the terms of settlement as stated in the said affidavit, by applying the same analogy and in order to do complete justice under Article 142 of the Constitution, we accept the terms of settlement insofar as the appellant herein (Accused No. 3) is concerned.”
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
“x x x x
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-13-
52. It needs no emphasis that exercise of inherent power by the High Court would entirely depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. It is neither permissible nor proper for the court to provide a straitjacket formula regulating the exercise of inherent powers under Section 482. No precise and inflexible guidelines can also be provided.
x x x x
56. We find no incongruity in the above principle of law and the decisions of this Court in Simrikhia, Dharampal, Arun Shankar Shukla, Ishwar Singh, Rumi Dhar (Smt.).28 and Ashok Sadarangani. The principle propounded in Simrikhia that the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be invoked to override express bar provided in law is by now well settled. In Dharampal, the Court observed the same thing that the inherent powers under section 482 of the Code cannot be utilised for exercising powers which are expressly barred by the Code. Similar statement of law is made in Arun Shankar Shukla. In Ishwar Singh, the accused was alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and with reference to Section 320 of the Code, it was held that the offence punishable under Section 307 Indian Penal Code was not compoundable offence and there was express bar in Section 320 that no offence shall be compounded if it is not compoundable under the Code. In Rumi Dhar (Smt.)28 although the accused had paid the entire due amount as per the settlement with the bank in the matter of recovery before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, the accused was being proceeded with for commission of offences under Section 120B, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code along with the bank officers who were being prosecuted under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The Court refused to quash the charge against the accused by holding that the Court would not quash a case involving a crime against the society when a prima facie case has been made out against the accused for framing the charge. Ashok Sadarangani was again a case where the accused persons were charged of having committed offences under sections 120B, 465, 467, 468 and 471, Indian Penal Code and the allegations were that the accused secured the credit facilities by submitting forged property documents as collaterals and utilised such facilities in a dishonest and fraudulent manner by opening letters of credit in respect of foreign supplies of goods, without actually bringing any goods but inducing the bank to negotiate the letters of credit in favour of foreign suppliers and also by misusing the cash-credit facility. The Court was alive to the reference made in one of the present matters and also the decisions in B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant and Manoj Sharma and it was held that B.S. Joshi, and Nikhil Merchant dealt with different factual situation as the dispute involved had overtures of a civil dispute but the case under consideration in Ashok Sadarangani was more on the criminal intent than on a civil aspect. The decision in Ashok Sadarangani
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-14-
supports the view that the criminal matters involving overtures of a civil dispute stand on a different footing.
57. The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between the victim and offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -15other connected cases
“ 31. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:
(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 or 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.
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-16-
(VI) Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore is to be generally treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the settlement and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in the later case it would be permissible for the High Court to accept the plea compounding the offence based on complete settlement between the parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship.
(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. Similarly, in those cases where the conviction is already recorded by the trial court and the matter is at the appellate stage before the High Court, mere compromise between the parties would not be a ground to accept the same resulting in acquittal of the offender who has already been convicted by the trial court. Here charge is proved under Section 307 IPC and conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and, therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty of such a crime.
9.
Furthermore, the Apex Court in a judgment rendered in case
titled as Ramgopal and another versus State of Madhya Pradesh , reported
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -17other connected cases
in 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 322 , the relevant paragraphs whereof become extracted hereinafter, whereins the relevant to the instant case, thus the principles of law become summarized-
“18. 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.
19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences ‘compoundable’ within the statutory framework, the extra-ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.”
verdicts rendered by the Apex Court in cases titled as (i) Gian Singh versus State of Punjab , reported in 2012(10) SCC 393 , (ii) Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another, reported in 2014(6) SCC 466 , and (iii) Ramgopal and another versus State of Madhya Pradesh , reported in 2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 322 , are inter alia hereunders.
(a) The jurisdiction invested in the High Courts under Section 482 Cr.P.C., which is now substituted by Section 528 in the newly
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 enacted BNSS, thus encompass a power in the High Courts to, after I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -18other connected cases
quashing and setting aside the judgment of conviction, and, consequent thereto sentence, passed by the learned Magesterial Court, thus whereagainst a subjudice appeal is maintained by the aggrieved convict, thus to also order for the composition of the apposite offence(s), besides to also make an order for the quashing of the launched criminal proceedings. However, yet the plenitude of power (supra) invested in the High Courts, is irrespective of the apposite offence(s) being omitted to be detailed in the earlier Section 320 Cr.P.C., and, in the replacing thereto Section 359, as engrafted in BNSS, rather to be compoundable even with the leave of the Court. The conspicuous reason for the said statement of law being made thereins, is that, the provisions (supra) do not control the plenitude of jurisdiction vested in the High Courts, especially when the said untrammeled jurisdiction is to prevent the abuse of the process of Courts, moreso, when for ensuring the prevalance of amity and goodwill amongst the concerned, thus the parties make a settlement rather for seeking an order of composition.
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -19other connected cases
therewith heinous offences.
(c) The compromise being free from any taint of any extraneous consideration, and/or being completely consensual, thus for ensuring the prevalence of amity and goodwill amongst all concerned.
complainant/victim or upon the informant, thus by the offender(s)
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -20other connected cases
concerned, thereupon normally, the Courts of law ask for the statements of all concerned, becoming recorded before the learned Illaqa Magistrate, and, besides require that to the effect (supra) echoings become made in the status report, as asked to be furnished by the Illaqa Magistrate concerned, before this Court.
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -21other connected cases
this Court, based upon the judgments (supra) wherebys they proceeded to receive piecemeal settlements drawn amongst the concerned, and, also proceeded to record a piecemeal order of composition, are prima facie made outside the contours of the guidelines spelt in the verdicts (supra). In consequence, the view(s) taken in the said verdicts, thus is per incuriam, the expostulations of law (supra), therebys the said adopted view(s), thus to the considered mind of this Court, but require(s) to be hereafter not become adopted by the learned Single Benches of this Court.
“What persons may be charged jointly.
The following persons may be charged and tried together, namely;
1. persons accused of the same offence committed in the course of the same transaction;
2. persons accused of an offence and persons accused of abetment of, or attempt to commit, such offence;
3. persons accused of more than one offence of the same kind, within the meaning of section 219 committed by them jointly within the period of twelve months;
4. persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction;
5. persons accused of an offence which includes theft, extortion, cheating, or criminal misappropriation, and
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 other connected cases
-22-
persons accused of receiving or retaining, or assisting in the disposal or concealment of, property possession of which is alleged to have been transferred by any such offence committed by the first-named persons, or of abetment of or attempting to commit any such lastnamed offence;
6. persons accused of offences under sections 411 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or either of those sections in respect of stolen property the possession of which has been transferred by one offence;
7. persons accused of any offence under Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) relating to counterfeit coin and persons accused of any other offence under the said Chapter relating to the same coin, or of abetment of or attempting to commit any such offence; and the provisions contained in the former part of this Chapter shall, so far as may be, apply to all such charges; Provided that where a number of persons are charged with separate offences and such persons do not fall within any of the categories specified in this section, the Magistrate or Court of Sessions may, if such persons by an application in writing, so desire, and if he is satisfied that such persons would not be prejudicially affected thereby, and it is expedient so to do, try all such persons together.”
charges are drawn in terms of the apposite final report, thus do also become Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this documentjointly tried, but yet only after the accused pleading not guilty to the said Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -23other connected cases
drawn charges against them.
(a) The accused whose names do not occur in the settlement, becoming ill led to face trial of the charged offence(s).
(b) Even the aggrieved victim/complainant/informant, if he/she is a part of the piecemeal compromise, thus may become disempowered, to ensure the success of the charge, as he/she would become confronted with the order making a piecemeal composition of the offence.
The further effect of the above would be twofold, inasmuch as,
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -24other connected cases
it would cause incision both to the prosecution, besides may even present an ill-situation to the trial Judge, thus in the following events-
(a) In case the aggrieved victim/complainant/informant on his/her stepping into the witness box, refuses to acknowledge the signing of the settlement, therebys but obviously the order of composition may become vitiated.
(b) Upon the accused, in case he/she acknowledges his/her appending his/her signatures or thumb impressions on the settlement, thereupon, the obvious availability to the defence to confront the victim/complainant/informant, thus with the piecemeal order of composition, but naturally would comprise a permissible exculpatory tool, thus to on an anvil thereof, make suggestions that therebys the entire prosecution case, thus warrants that the same staggers. The said suggestion may be to the extent that the compromise was drawn with an ill intention or with malafides, besides became ridden with a vice of extraneous consideration, therebys the non inclusion thereins of the accused, who are led to face the trial, was only as a measure of wreaking vendetta upon the accused, who was led to face trial, wherebys but naturally the proceedings in trial launched against the accused, who are left to be joined in the settlement, may ultimately become concluded to become embarked with the vice qua therebys there being not only an abuse of the process of law, but also the said proceedings being potentialized only to harass and humiliate the said accused.
Now there may be also a situation where a charge of vicarious
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -25other connected cases
liability is cumulatively drawn against all the offenders, however, in case the principal offender makes a successful settlement with the aggrieved victim/complainant, thus excluding either-
(a) That the compromise was ridden with the vice of extraneous consideration;
(b) The same while leaving out the accused with the incriminatory role(s) (supra), was with a malafide intent to unnecessarily continue the criminal proceedings against him;
(c) On the falling apart of the charge against the principal accused, through the making of a piecemeal order of composition, therebys the Public Prosecutor would be faced with an ill-situation, wherebys he may become disabled to prove the joint constructive criminal liability, to be otherwise foisted also upon the accused, thus with the incriminatory role(s) (supra), especially when the main accused or the principal offender against whom charges are also required to be proven but conjointly along with the other co-accused, thus becomes left out from the array of the accused, upon, his
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -26other connected cases
receiving a piecemeal order of composition.
that no damage accrues to the moral conscience of the society nor the moral
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
CRM-M-48043-2023 -27other connected cases
conscience of the society becoming shaken. It is but to avoid the above illcasualities or the ill-situations (supra), that the Hon’ble Supreme Court, has in the verdicts (supra), thus has made supra guidelines, wherebys but obviously there is a requirement of exercisings of self-restraint by the High Courts, in receiving piecemeal settlements, and, also subsequently in making piecemeal orders of composition. Reiteratedly, the ill effects of receivings of such piecemeal settlements and also the makings of consequent thereto piecemeal orders of composition, thus naturally would be the above. In sequel, issue No. 1 is answered accordingly.
Final order
(SURESHWAR THAKUR) JUDGE
(SUDEEPTI SHARMA) JUDGE
November 12th , 2024 Gurpreet
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No
Gurpreet Singh 2024.11.13 10:27 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Can a partial compromise justify quashing an FIR only against some accused despite its repercussions on the trial of other co-accused?
Does partial quashing on a partial compromise permit the victim to become the driver of the criminal justice system?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Lovely Salhotra versus State of NCT of Delhi and anotherDistinguished¶59
2017 (3) RCR (Criminal) 85
Jayrajsingh Digvijay Singh Rana versus State of Gujarat and anotherDistinguished¶67
2012 (4) RCR (Criminal) 589
Gian Singh versus State of PunjabRelied on¶119
2012(10) SCC 393 · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and anotherRelied on¶96
2014(6) SCC 466 · Who else cites this
Ramgopal and another versus State of Madhya PradeshRelied on¶119
2012(4) RCR (Criminal) 322
6 provisions across 3 enactments
Rakesh Das
State of Haryana
Asha Rani
State of Punjab
Baljit Singh Walia @ Baljit Singh
Kuldip Singh
SURESHWAR THAKUR
SUDEEPTI SHARMA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
