ORDER

% 05.01.2024 CRL.M.A. 388/2024 in CRL.M.C. 96/2024 (exemption from filing certified copies of all the annexures) CRL.M.A. 401/2024 in CRL.M.C. 101/2024 (exemption from filing certified copies of all the annexures)

1. Exemptions allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The applications stand disposed of.

3. The present petitions are filed for quashing of FIR No.

388/2019 under Section 308 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’), and also FIR No. 389/2019 under Section 326 of IPC, both dated 20.10.2019, registered at Police Station Kishan Garh South respectively.

4. It is averred that due to some misunderstanding and miscommunication, an altercation took place between the parties, who were neighbours. This led to filing of the cross-FIR Nos. 388/2019 and 389/2019. Currently, FIR No.388/2019 is pending before learned ASJ, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, and FIR No. 389/2019 is pending before learned MM, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi.

5. The present petitions are filed on the ground that the parties have amicably settled all their disputes and buried their differences, without any coercion or pressure, with the intervention of well wishers and respectable members of the society.

6. The learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties undertake to live peacefully in the future, and to not indulge in any such activities.

7. The parties are present and have been duly identified by the IO, and state that they do not have any objection if the proceedings are quashed. The IO also states that he has no objection if the proceedings are quashed.

8. Offence under Section 323 IPC is compoundable whereas offence under Section 308 IPC is non-compoundable.

9. It is well settled that the High Court while exercising its powers under Section 482 CrPC can compound offences which are non-compoundable under the Code on the ground that there is a compromise between the accused and the complainant. The Hon’ble Apex Court has laid down parameters and guidelines for High Court while accepting settlement and quashing the proceedings. In Narinder Singh & Ors. V. State of Punjab & Anr. reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Supreme Court has observed 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 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 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, t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document