The court can quash criminal proceedings based on settlement if it serves the ends of justice and prevents abuse of the court process, as per the Supreme Court's principles.

SURESH KAIT, J.

Crl. M.A. No.11297/2015 (Exemption)

Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

Accordingly, the application is allowed.

CRL.M.C. No.3159/2015

1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner seek quashing of FIR No.273/2012 registered at Police Dabri, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 288/304A of the IPC and the consequential proceedings emanating therefrom against him.

2. Learned counsel for petitioner submit that the aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioner on the complaint of respondent No.2, who is father of the deceased. After the investigation, police has filed the charge sheet, however, charges are yet to be framed. In the meanwhile, respondent No.2 has settled this matter with the petitioner and the petitioner as well as the landlord has compensated the father of deceased. Respondent No.2 has received the compensation amount from them and thus does not wish to pursue the present case against the petitioner.

3. Respondent No.2 is personally present in the Court with learned counsel Mr. Sanjay Kumar and has been duly identified by ASI Davender Singh. Learned counsel for respondent No.2 on instruction submits that petitioner and respondent No.2 have settled the matter and on receipt of compensation, he does not wish to pursue the case against the petitioner any more.

4. Learned APP appearing on behalf of the State submits that after investigation charge sheet has been filed, however charges are yet to be framed against petitioner. She submits that since the respondent No.2 has received the compensation from petitioner which has been received without any pressure of coercion, the State has no objection, if the present petition is allowed as no purpose would be served if the petitioner is directed to face trial.

5. Under the circumstances and looking to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim, if the circumstances so warrant; by observing as under:

“58. ....However, certain offences which overwhelmingly and predominantly bear civil flavour having arisen out of civil, mercantile, commercial, financial, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony, particularly relating to dowry, etc. or the family dispute, where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the High Court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or FIR if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.”

6. While recognizing the need of amicable resolution of disputes in cases like the instant one, the aforesaid dictum has been affirmed by the Apex Court in a recent judgment in Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 6 SCC 466. The pertinent observations of the Apex Court are as under:-

“29. 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:

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