A Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C has been filed by the accused to quash complaints filed by the complainant under Section 307 IPC.
The brief factual background of the case is that the accused was arguing with his mother and when the complainant asked him not to do so, the accused started abusing him and then stabbed him. The accused also stabbed the complainant on the stomach.
Although the matter was settled between the parties the court went into the question as to whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings on account of settlement between the parties. Reliance was made on the Supreme Court Judgement in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab wherein the court held that, that the High Court does actually have the power to quash such criminal proceedings. In this case a test was laid down as under:-
“The High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of 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”
The Second question that the court considered was whether a criminal complaint under Section 307 IPC be quashed by the High Court. Although there were certain inconsistencies with respect to matter, the final position was laid down in the State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan wherein the court stated that offence under Section 307 is heinous in nature and is indeed against the society which has a serious impact on the society and cannot be quashed under Section 482. However the court in this case also stated that the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR. The Court, it was stated must examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC 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 IPC.
Keeping in view that the accused was a young 21 year boy who had a whole life ahead of him, the court therefore quashed the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C on the ground that the parties have entered into a compromise. The court also warned the young boy to indulge in such practice and also asked him to perform community service at a Gurdwara for a period of one month.
Case Details
Name- MOHD UMAIR @ UMER v. STATE ( GOVT NCT OF DELHI) AND ORS & ANR
CRL.M.C. 674/2021
Coram- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Share this Document :Picture Source :
