kapoorsatish (n/a) 21 December 2008

Can complainant compromise in criminal complaint

Can complainant compromise with accused in criminal complaint which resulted in FIR u/s 469, 467, 471, 420, 406, 409, 120B, before police files chargesheet in court i.e. case under investigation since 2003, FIR filed in 2006, investigations not yet completed and accused niether arrested nor chargesheet filled in Court.

Reply Follow

10 Replies

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer) 23 December 2008

Law does not provide for compromise in the case of non compoundable offences. At the most police may use discretion not to send charge sheet depending upon the statements given before investigating officer.

Shree. ( Advocate.) 24 December 2008

Dear Kapoor,

As per the rules of the Criminal Procedure in India, only compoundable offences can be settled outside the court. Once a criminal complaint is registered, in the case of non - compoundable offences, it cannot be withdrawn, even if a compromise is reached between the parties, as serious criminal offences are crimes against society and, not, merely, against individuals. However, Lok Adalats can be extremely helpful in case of compoundable offences as compensation can be awarded by the Lok Adalats, without resorting to long drawn out court procedures.

Gothrough the following case law:

In Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandrajirao Angre JT 1988 (1) SC 279,

it was explained by the Supreme Court that it was for the High Court while exercising its power under Section 482 CrPC to consider whether it was expedient and in the interests of justice to permit the prosecution to continue. One of the factors mentioned by the Supreme Court is whether, in the opinion of the court, chances of an ultimate conviction is bleak and, therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution to continue. Applying this decision to the facts on hand it requires to be acknowledged that for proving forgery, the prosecution does not have to rely only upon the evidence of the complainant; it can be proved even by the report of the CFSL. This is not therefore a case where the chances of ultimate conviction are rendered bleak on account of the complainant having settled the matter with the

accused. This court cannot be unmindful of the fact that in criminal cases there are only two parties, viz., the accused and the State. When one of the parties i.e. State is not agreeable to the quashing of the proceedings, and the evidence that has been gathered supports the continuation of the trial for the offences of forgery and use of forged documents under Sections 468 and 471 IPC respectively, it would not be appropriate for this Court to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings only on the ground that the accused and the complainant have settled their disputes. While each case has been to be examined for its peculiar

facts, the larger interests of justice and the rule of law will also have to be borne in mind. The offence of forgery is not merely against the party who is misled as a result of the use of such forged document but against the State as such. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court finds merit in the objection raised by learned APP for the State to the quashing of the criminal proceedings in this case. Accordingly, the petition stands dismissed and the pending application stands disposed of.

RAKHI BUDHIRAJA ADVOCATE (LAWYER AT BUDHIRAJA & ASSOCIATES SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) 24 December 2008

Both my friends are absolutely right.

advocate satya (advocate) 27 December 2008

i think in recent judgement of supreme court even non compoundable matters can be compromised, i further provide the exact judgement

B.P. Bhardwaj (delhi) 27 December 2008

I agreed with Mr. Satya with little difference of opinion, in Non-compoundable offences case, complainant can withdraw the case only with the permission of the court councerned, I have also withdrawn a matter in same sections.

kapoorsatish (n/a) 27 December 2008

Thanks for reply, Please give latest Supreme court judgement which allows compromise on non compoundable offences.

regards

S.K.kapoor

PALNITKAR V.V. (Lawyer) 28 December 2008

There is no judgment of SC which allows compromise in non compoundable cases.

Pankaj Kundra (Advocate) 29 December 2008

Mr Bhardwaj/Mr Satya

If there is a Supreme court judgement on compromise outside the court in a non compoundable offence kindly provide the details ..

Shree. ( Advocate.) 30 December 2008

I am too eagerly waiting for the Apex courts judgement and it may be useful for future reference to us.

V.V.RAMDAS (Advocate) 30 December 2008

Dear Kapoor,

As per your question section 420 and 406 I.P.C are copoundable with the permission of the court as contmplated in Section 320(2) Cr.P.C but the rest of the sections are not compoundable and as per the recent Supreme Court decision non -compoundable offences cannot be compounded . Any how if the informant/complainant is agreed to to compromise than there is no harm to file a petition u/s 320(2) Cr.P.C for which the case will be autometically become week and accordingly the prosecution witnesses will not proceed futher in case and the accused will be aquited. ( Ramdas)