Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences could be quashed on the basis of compromise between the accused and the complainant in the facts of the case.
Analysis: The governing principle recognised in the earlier decisions was that the Supreme Court and the High Court may, in appropriate cases, use their extraordinary or inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process and to secure the ends of justice, even where the offence is not compoundable. That power, however, is to be exercised sparingly and only where the facts show that continuance of the prosecution would be futile after settlement between the parties. The present matter was found to be materially different from the cases relied upon by the petitioners because the allegations were not confined to a civil dispute with criminal overtones. The complaint involved a larger criminal conspiracy and the use of property lacking proper title as collateral security, together with allegations of forged documents. In that setting, the compromise with the banks did not eliminate the criminal element or justify quashing of the prosecution.
Conclusion: The request to quash the criminal proceedings was rejected, and the petitioners were not entitled to relief.