KAKHETO SEMA
Tukfi Riang S/o Shri Adori Riang – Appellant
Versus
State Of AP, Through Public Prosecutor – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Heard Mr. D. Laji, learned counsel for the petitioners and Ms. T.Jini, learned Addl. P.P, for the State of Arunachal Pradesh.
2. That the present petition has been jointly filed by the petitioner No. 1 & 2 under section 482 Cr. P.C to set aside and quash the Bomdila Session Case No. 13/2016 arising out of Seppa P.S Case No. 51/2011 under section 366/354 IPC which is pending trial before the learned Sessions Judge, Bomdila.
3. The petitioner No.1 is the accused in the case and the petitioner No.2 is the informant/victim. Both the petitioner No. 1 & 2 are stated to be related by marriage. The elder brother of the petitioner No.1, Mr. TachungRiang being married to Smti.YatakRimo, the elder sister of the petitioner No.2.
4. That on 12.06.2011, the petitioner No.2 lodged a complaint stating that on 11.06.2011 at about 15:00 Hrs, the petitioner No. 1 who was the president of the All Kameng District Student Union on the pretext of discharging some student works took the petitioner No.2 to Lumdang road and physically assaulted her. The police accordingly registered the Seppa P.S Case No. 51/2011 under section 366/354 IPC against the petitioner No.1 and arrested him.
5. The police hav
Kumol Tayeng Versus State of Arunachal Pradesh
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others Versus State of Gujarat & Another
Shiji @ Pappu & Another versus Radhika & Another
State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Laxmi Narayan & Others
Unnikrishnan @ Unnikuttan Versus State of Kerala
Varala Bharath Kumar & Another Versus State of Telangana & Another
The court emphasized the careful exercise of the power to quash criminal proceedings, especially in cases involving heinous and serious offences, and highlighted the wide inherent powers of the High ....
The High Court cannot quash criminal proceedings for serious offences like abetment of suicide based on a settlement, as such crimes impact society and require trial.
Offences under Section 307 IPC are serious and heinous, lacking the possibility of being quashed based on private compromise. Hence, societal interest in prosecuting such crimes prevails.
High Court can quash non-compoundable FIRs under Section 482 when parties reach amicable settlements, preserving justice and avoiding abuse of process.
Heinous and serious offences cannot be quashed based on a compromise between the parties, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Serious and heinous offences, especially those affecting the society at large, cannot be quashed based on a settlement between the parties, as it is in the interest of society that the offender shoul....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.