The court may quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. if the victim expresses no objection and the parties have resolved their disputes, considering the nature of the offences and societal impact.

JUDGMENT :

V. Narasingh, J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner, learned counsel for the State and learned counsel for the informant.

2. The present CRLMC has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. by the accused for quashing of order of cognizance dated 03.05.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Champua in Special Case No.10 of 2022 under Sections 366 /376(2)(n)/506/450 of IPC read with Sections 3(2)(va)/3(2)(v) S.C/S.T (PoA) Act, inter alia, on the ground that the victim has joined the Petitioner in matrimony and both leading a blissful conjugal life.

3. The power of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceeding in cases which are not compoundable arose for consideration and set at rest by the Larger Bench of the Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in (2019) 5 SCC 688.

4. The law in this regard was summed up in paragraph-15 of the said judgment which is culled out hereunder:-

“15. 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:

15.1. 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 character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;

15.2. Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved 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;

15.3. Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes 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;

15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore. the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 . For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read