2003 (2) KLT 1062 (SC)
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Y.K. Sabharwal & Hon'ble Mr.Justice H.K. Sema
Joshi v. State of Haryana
Crl. A. No. 383 of 2003
Decided on 13th March, 2003.
Criminal P.C. 1973, Ss. 482 and 320 - Exercise of inherent powers by High Court - Quashing of criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint - S. 320 does not limit or affect the powers of High Court.
The decision of Supreme Court in Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1978 SC 47, does not lay down any general proposition limiting power of quashing the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint as vested in S. 482 of the code or extraordinary power under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary. S. 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether
2010 (1) KLT 289
Hon'ble Mr. Justice M. Sasidharan Nambiar
Biju Eappen v. State of Kerala
Crl. M.C. No.3695 of 2009
Decided on 21st December, 2009
Penal Code 1860, S.498A - Criminal P.C. 1973, S.482 - Conviction and sentence u/S.498A can, and definetely, be set aside, by the High Court, where settlement is reached between rival parties - However no directions can be given to Sessions Court to permit the parties to compound an offence u/S.498A since the offence is non-compoundable.
Questions raised are:
(i) Whether a sentence and conviction u/S.498A, while pending in appeal before a Sessions Court, can be quashed u/S.482 Crl. P.C. in view of the settlement reached between parties ?
(ii) Whether a direction can be given to a Sessions Judge to permit the parties to compound an offence u/S.498A?
While pending appeal, the petitioner, a convict u/S.498A, settled the issues with his wife, and in such circumstances the present petition u/S.482 is filed for setting aside the conviction and sentence. While allowing the petition the High Court observed that, since the offence u/S.498A is not a compoundable offence, no direction can be issued to the Sessions Court to permit the parties to compound the offence, but, the High Court can, and definitely, set aside conviction and quash proceedings in such circumstances.
Held: An offence under S.498A of Indian Penal Code is not a compoundable offence. In such circumstances, learned Sessions Judge cannot be directed to permit the parties to compound the offence in Crl.A. No.57/2009. It is not in the interest of justice to continue the prosecution. Therefore, though the Sessions Judge cannot set aside the conviction based on the settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court, exercising the extraordinary inherent power under S.482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, could, definitely, set aside the conviction and quash the proceedings, when due to the settlement of all the matrimonial disputes, conviction passed by the learned Magistrate under Annexure-Al, is necessarily to be interfered with, to secure justice, exercising the powers under S.482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. (para. 5)
2003 (2) KLT 1062 (SC) = (2003) 4 SCC 675 Followed
As Karnataka HC is in India they have to accept the ruling of the Sureme Court. Kindly file petition u/s 482 before the Karnataka along with settlement agreement .