A, an accused is being tried under Section 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and under Section 452 (house-trespass after preparation of hurt) of IPC. He gives an application to the trial c… Is the order of the trial court valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law.

Question: A, an accused is being tried under Section 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and under Section 452 (house-trespass after preparation of hurt) of IPC. He gives an application to the trial court seeking permission to compound the offences under the aforesaid Sections.

The court rejects the application on the ground that as Section 452 is non-compoundable, permission cannot be granted even though Section 325 is compoundable. Is the order of the trial court valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law.

Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [A, an accused is being tried under Section 325 (voluntarily causing grievous hurt) and under Section 452 (house-trespass after preparation of hurt) of IPC. He gives an application to the trial c… Is the order of the trial court valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law.]

Answer

In the decision of Rajinder Singh v. State (Delhi Administration) AIR 1980 SC 1200, the accused-petitioner had been convicted under Sections 325 and 45, Indian Penal Code. A petition was filed in the Supreme Court stating that the parties had compromised the case. The offence under Section 325 being compoundable with the permission of the Court was granted, and the offence under Section 452 being non-compoundable, the Supreme Court, while maintaining the conviction, reduced the sentence to the period already undergone.

It had been held by the Supreme Court that an offence which is not compoundable under section 320 of CrPC could not be allowed to be compounded even if there is a settlement between the complainant and the accused. However, a settlement between the parties can be considered for determining the quantum of the sentence.

Therefore, in the case of Gulab Das v. State of MP, AIR 2012 SC 888, where the incident had taken place in 1994 and the parties were related to each other and the accused had served a substantial part of the sentence, the Supreme Court reduced the sentence to period already undergone.

The question as to when quashing of the proceedings of Court settlement of non-compoundable offences dehors section 320 can be passed in exercise of powers under section 482 CrPC has been answered in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303 as:

“The power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz;

• to secure the ends of justice or,
• to prevent abuse of the process of any Court.

In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and the victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercising such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim’s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and seriously impact society.

Similarly, any compromise between the victim and the offender in relation to the offences under special statutes like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity, etc., cannot provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on a different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute.

In this category of cases, the High Court may quash the criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and the victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of the criminal case would put the accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim.

In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or whether continuation of the criminal proceeding would be tantamount to abuse of the process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in the affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”

Thus, the order of the court rejected the application on the ground that as Section 452 is non-compoundable, permission cannot be granted even though Section 325 is compoundable and is valid in the eyes of law.

---

Important Mains/Long Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
2. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
3. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
4. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
5. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
6. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
7. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
8. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
9. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
10. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
11. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part XI: Important Questions