NAVRANG PAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .Law is stable but not static. Law has to evolve from stage to stage. The evolution of law is occasioned every time there is a need to grow out of the shackles of norms or views which in the changed scenario do not provide remedy for a situation which is crying for one.

(2.) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the `Code') as also its predecessor the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 recongised the rights of the waring parties in a criminal litigation to settle their disputes without trial and the right of the accused to be acquitted on the complainant agreeing to such a decision. This right, however, was qualified by categorising certain matters as compoundable without the permission of the court and other offences which could be compounded only with the permission of the court. This was available in Section 320 of the Code. The offences which are mentioned in Section 320 of the Code, if compounded results in an order of acquittal. The power can be exercised by the trial court both by the court of Magistrate or of Sessions. The question that has arisen is whether the High Court by virtue of its power recognised in Section 482 of the Code can quash the proceedings in a criminal case emanating from a complaint regarding a non-compoundable offence.

(3.) The point raised is not new. Two recent decisions one of the Supreme Court and the other of a Five-Judge Bench of this Court have already ruled on it. The judgment of the Supreme Court is pronounced in the case of B.S.Joshi & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. reported as JT 2003 (3) SC 277. The case before the Supreme Court was one under Sections 498-A/406 of the Indian Penal Code. The parties to the dispute were husband and wife. The Supreme Court in this judgment went into the scope of the provisions of Section 482 of the Code and held that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power for quashing. It, however, hastened to add that the court would decide whether to quash the FIR or not, depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case. It, thus, held that in a suitable case on the compromise of the parties, the High Court could quash a criminal proceeding on a complaint in a non-compoundable case and that Section 320 of the Code could not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code.