Criminal Trident Pack: IPC, CrPC and IEA by Sr. Adv. G.S Shukla and Adv. Raghav Arora
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

320 crpc please read the question

What happens where in a case one is compoundable offence & other is non- compoundable offence?
Can the former get compounded & later offence be tried for?
Or, none of them are allowed to be compounded & trial for both needs to be done?


Learning

 2 Replies

Twinkle Madaan   04 July 2022

Hello sir,

To answer your questions i would like to quote the the Narinder Singh Case, in this the Supreme Court took into consideration the Gian Singh Case and observed that the high court can quash the criminal proceedings even in case of non-compoundable offences in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the CrPC, when the parties have entered into a compromise. However, this power must be used sparingly and with caution. The Supreme Court observed that even though offence under Section 307 of the IPC is against the society, the high courts can examine whether the incorporation of Section 307 of the IPC is for name sake or there actually is enough evidence to prove it.

In light of catena of decisions and considering the law on the point, the Supreme Court laid down the following guidelines for quashing criminal proceeding in case of non-compoundable offences by high courts when invoking their inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC:

  • Predominantly civil nature of offence - The power conferred on high Courts under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash criminal proceeding for non-compoundable offences under section 320 of the CrPC can be exercised where the offence involved is merely a predominantly civil and commercial matter;
  • Heinous and serious offences - High courts must refrain from quashing criminal proceedings if the offence is a heinous and serious offence which has a serious impact on society;
  • Offences under section 307 IPC - Even though the offence under Section 307 IPC falls under the category of heinous and serious offences and is against the society, the high courts may not rest its decision merely on the fact that the offence involved is under Section 307 of the IPC. The high court may examine whether the incorporation of Section 307 of the IPC is for name sake or there actually is enough evidence to prove it. For this purpose, the high court may examine the nature of the injury, whether the injury is on a vital body part, nature of the weapon used, etc. This would be permissible only after the evidence is collected and the charge-sheet is filed / charge is framed and / or during the trial. It is not permissible when the matter is under investigation;
  • Special statutes - The high court must refrain from quashing the criminal proceeding based on compromise between the victim and the offender, if the offence is under a special statute like Prevention of Corruption Act or committed by public servants while working in that capacity;
  • Antecedents / conduct of the accused - When the offences involved are private in nature, the high court, while exercising its power under Section 482 of the CrPC in respect of non-compoundable offences on ground that there is a compromise / settlement between the victim and accused, is required to consider the antecedents and conduct of the accused.

In short, the answer to your questions will depend on the various factors mentioned above. 

I hope this helps.

Thank you.

Kalpesh Suryawanshi- Mr Sensex   04 July 2022

Thank you so much

Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


Start a New Discussion Unreplied Threads



Popular Discussion


view more »




Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query