TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1935
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....grieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 7.10.2013 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior in Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 8000/2013, by which the High Court has allowed the said application, preferred by the Respondents herein/original Accused (hereinafter referred to as the 'Accused'), and in exercise of its powers Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, has quashed the proceedings against the Accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of Shiji @ Pappu and Ors. v. Radhika and Anr. (2011) 10 SCC 705, the State of Madhya Pradesh has preferred the present appeal. 2.1. Office report dated 18.08.2017 indicates that service of show cause notice on the Respondents is complete, and Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 are represented by Ms. Mridula Ray Bhardwaj, Advocate, but during the course of hearing, nobody appeared for the Respondents. 3 . The facts leading to this appeal are, that an FIR was lodged against the Respondents herein and two unknown persons at Police Station Raun, District Bhind, for the offences punishable Under S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd the complainant have settled the disputes amicably. While quashing the criminal proceedings against the Accused, the High Court has considered and relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Shiji (supra). 5. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order, quashing the criminal proceedings against the Accused for the offences punishable Under Sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the State of Madhya Pradesh has preferred the present appeal. 6. Learned advocate appearing on behalf of the State of Madhya Pradesh has vehemently submitted that the High Court has committed a grave error in quashing the FIR which was for the offences Under Sections 307 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 6.1. It is vehemently submitted by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant-State that in the present cases the High Court has quashed the FIR mechanically and solely on the basis of the settlement/compromise between the complainant and the Accused, without even considering the gravity and seriousness of the offences alleged against the Accused persons. 6.2. It is further submitted by the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant-Sta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ions of this Court in the cases of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J. Ramesh Kamath v. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh v. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471; Parbatbhai AAhir v. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641; and State of Madhya Pradesh v. Kalyan Singh, decided on 4.1.2019 in Criminal Appeal No. 14/2019, State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dhruv Gurjar, decided on 22.02.2019 in Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Criminal) No. 9859/2013. 6.5. Making the above submissions and relying upon the aforesaid decisions of this Court, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant-State has prayed to allow the present appeal and quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashing and setting aside the FIR, in exercise of its inherent powers Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 7 . As observed hereinabove, nobody appeared on behalf of the Respondents - Accused. 8. We have heard the learned Counsel for the Appellant at great length. 9. At the outset, it is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the case of Gian Singh (supra) , in paragraph 61, this Court has observed and held as under: 61. 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 FIR may be exercised where the offender and the 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....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ngs or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings: 29.1. 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. 29.2. 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. 29.3. Such a power is not to 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 the off....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship. 29.7. 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 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....olves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulate. (6) In the exercise of the power Under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences. (7) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned. (8) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 Indian Penal Code in the FIR or the charge is framed. Its further corroboration with the medical evidence or other evidence is to be seen, which will be possible during the trial only. Hence, the decision of this case in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) shall be of no assistance to the Accused in the present case. 11. Now so far as the reliance placed upon the decision of this Court in the case of Shiji (supra), while quashing the FIR by observing that as the complainant has compromised with the Accused, there is no possibility of recording a conviction, and/or the further trial would be an exercise in futility is concerned, we are of the opinion that the High Court has clearly erred in quashing the FIR on the aforesaid ground. It appears that the High Court has misread or misapplied the said decision to the facts of the cases on hand. The High Court ought to have appreciated that it is not in every case where the complainant has entered into a compromise with the Accused, there may not be any conviction. Such observations are presumptive and many a time too early to opine. In a given ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to determine whether it is a fit case in which the inherent powers may be invoked. 11.1. Therefore, the said decision may be applicable in a case which has its origin in the civil dispute between the parties; the parties have resolved the dispute; that the offence is not against the society at large and/or the same may not have social impact; the dispute is a family/matrimonial dispute etc. The aforesaid decision may not be applicable in a case where the offences alleged are very serious and grave offences, having a social impact like offences Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code. Therefore, without proper application of mind to the relevant facts and circumstances, in our view, the High Court has materially erred in mechanically quashing the FIR, by observing that in view of the compromise, there are no chances of recording conviction and/or the further trial would be an exercise in futility. The High Court has mechanically considered the aforesaid decision of this Court in the case of Shiji (supra), without considering the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. 12. Now so far as the conflict between the decisions of this Court in the cases of Narinder Singh (supra) and S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve 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 the 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. 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly 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. 29.5. 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. 29.6. Offences Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 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 to a conclusion as to whether the offence Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code 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 Indian Penal Code 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. 13. Considering the law on the point and the other decisions of this Court on the point, referred to hereinabove, it is observed and held as under: i) that the power conferred Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences Under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil characte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd in the circumstances stated hereinabove; v) while exercising the power Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the Accused; the conduct of the Accused, namely, whether the Accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc. 14. Insofar as the present case is concerned, the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings for the offences Under Sections 307 and 34 Indian Penal Code mechanically and even when the investigation was under progress. Somehow, the Accused managed to enter into a compromise with the complainant and sought quashing of the FIR on the basis of a settlement. The allegations are serious in nature. He used the fire arm also in commission of the offence. Therefore, the gravity of the offence and the conduct of the Accused is not at all considered by the High Court and solely on the basis of a settlement betwee....