SADHU RAM Vs. SH MAST RAM AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these cases have been taken up together on the joint request of learned counsel for the parties. The accused have been convicted by learned trial Court for commission of offences punishable under Sections 451 and 325 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) By way of present application, appellants/applicants have prayed for compounding/setting aside criminal proceedings initiated against them in which they have been convicted, on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between the appellants and the complainant, who are related to each other. Complainant Mast Ram is also present in the Court and he has stated that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and he does not intend to pursue the criminal proceedings against the appellants and he has no objection in case the judgment of conviction passed against the appellants is set aside. The compromise entered into between the parties has also been placed on record alongwith miscellaneous application.

(3.) Hon'Ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2012 10 SCC 303 has held that the inherent power conferred upon the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation, but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz. (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. It further held that in what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR 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. It further held that before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime and 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. It further held that criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominatingly 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 family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute.