Point of law: Section 320 of Cr. P.C does not limit or control exercise of powers vested in Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C.

ORDER :

Can criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable sexual offences against women and children be quashed upon a compromise between the accused and the victim, invoking section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure? – this is the common issue that falls into consideration in these bunch of cases.

2. The petitioners in all cases are the accused involved in sexual offences either under Chapter XVI of the Indian Penal Code (for short ‘IPC’) or under Chapter II of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (for short ‘POCSO Act’) or both. All of them seek to quash the proceedings on the ground of settlement with the victim.

3. Since there were divergent views on the subject by the Apex Court and High Courts across the country, I have directed the Counsel for the petitioners as well as the Public Prosecutors to address arguments in detail.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutors in extenso.

5. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that High Court possesses inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.P.C') to annul an FIR or criminal proceeding in appropriate cases where the offender and the victim have settled their dispute notwithstanding the fact that the offence involved is a sexual offence against women or children. The learned counsel further submitted that when the matter has been amicably settled, the victim would not support the prosecution case, and the possibility of conviction would be bleak. The continuation of proceedings, in such circumstances, would be a sheer waste of precious judicial time and public money, submitted the Counsel. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutors submitted that rape or sexual offence against women or children is a heinous crime against society, and any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to such an offence could not ordinarily provide for any basis for quashing the criminal proceedings in exercise of the wholesome power of the High Court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. They further submitted that compromises legalise rape and offer an escape route to the perpetrators. However, they fairly concurred with the view expressed by this court that there cannot be total embargo in exercising the extraordinary power vested with this court under section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings based on the settlement between the accused and the sexual assault victim in suitable cases to do complete justice to them. The learned Public Prosecutors added that in all the cases, enquiry was conducted through respective investigating officers regarding the genuineness of the settlement and the statement of the victims was also recorded wherein they admitted that the matter was amicably settled.

6. Compounding in the context of criminal law means forbearance from prosecution because of an amicable settlement between the parties. Section 320 is the only statutory provision in Cr.P.C. for compounding the offence. It classifies the offences which are simply compoundable and compoundable with the permission of the Court [S.320(1) and S.320(2)]. The lawmakers never thought of incorporating any specific provision in Cr.P.C. for compounding an offence other than the offences mentioned in sections 320(1) and 320(2). There may be cases where the victim is prepared to condone the offensive conduct of the accused, who became chastened and repentant even though the offence charged is non-compoundable. The criminal law administered in the country is not attuned to take note of such situations and to provide a remedy to terminate the criminal proceedings. However, through judicial intervention, the Apex Court found a solution in cases where accusations are non-bailable and non-compoundable, holding that recourse to inherent powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. would be permissible e