LexDAXABEN versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B C D E F G H 295 DAXABEN v. THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS. (Criminal Appeal Nos. 1061-1084 of 2022) JULY 29, 2022 [INDIRA BANERJEE AND V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s. 482 – Quashing of FIR – FIR u/s.306 for abetment to commit suicide, entailing punishment of imprisonment of ten years – Quashed by the High Court on the basis of a settlement between the complainant and the accused named in the FIR – On appeal, held: Once an FIR and/or criminal complaint is lodged and a criminal case is started by the State, it becomes a matter between the State and the accused – State has a duty to ensure that law and order is maintained in society and the offender is prosecuted – An informant has no right in law to withdraw the complaint of a non- compoundable offence of a grave, serious and/ or heinous nature, which impacts society – Offence u/s. 306 of abetment to commit suicide is a grave, non-compoundable offence – s.307 falls in the category of heinous and serious offences and are to be treated as crime against society and not against the individual alone – On a parity of reasoning, offence u/s. 306 would fall in the same category – An FIR u/s. 306 cannot even be quashed on the basis of any financial settlement with the informant, surviving spouse, parents, children, guardians, care-givers or anyone else – Thus, the impugned orders of the High Court set aside – Penal Code, 1860 – s. 306. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The issue whether the criminal miscellaneous applications filed by the accused under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could have been allowed and an FIR under Section 306 IPC for abetment to commit suicide, entailing punishment of imprisonment of ten years, could have been quashed on the basis of a settlement between the complainant and the accused named in the FIR, is answered in negative. [Para 25][308-C-D] [2022] 13 S.C.R. 295 295 A B C D E F G H 296 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2022] 13 S.C.R. 1.2 Even though, the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C., to interfere with criminal proceedings is wide, such power has to be exercised with circumspection, in exceptional cases. Jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C is not to be exercised for the asking. In exceptional cases, to prevent abuse of the process of the Court, the High Court might in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 quash criminal proceedings. However, interference would only be justified when the complaint did not disclose any offence, or was patently frivolous, vexatious or oppressive. [Paras 27, 29][308-F; 309-A- B] 1.3 Offence under Section 306 of the IPC of abetment to commit suicide is a grave, non-compoundable offence. Of course, the inherent power of the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. is wide and can even be exercised to quash criminal proceedings relating to non-compoundable offences, to secure the ends of justice or to prevent abuse of the process of Court. Where the victim and offender have compromised disputes essentially civil and personal in nature, the High Court can exercise its power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the criminal proceedings. In what cases power to quash an FIR or a criminal complaint or criminal proceedings upon compromise can be exercised, would depend on the facts and circumstances of the case. However, before exercising its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash an FIR, criminal complaint and/or criminal proceedings, the High Court has to be circumspect and have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous or serious crimes, which are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society cannot be quashed on the basis of a compromise between the offender and the complainant and/or the victim. Crimes like murder, rape, burglary, dacoity and even abetment to commit suicide are neither private nor civil in nature. Such crimes are against the society. In no circumstances can prosecution be quashed on compromise, when the offence is serious and grave and falls within the ambit of crime against society. [Paras 37, 38][313-D-G] 1.4 Orders quashing FIRs and/or complaints relating to grave and serious offences only on basis of an agreement with A B C D E F G H 297 the complainant, would set a dangerous precedent, where complaints would be lodged for oblique reasons, with a view to extract money from the accused. Furthermore, financially strong offenders would go scot free, even in cases of grave and serious offences such as murder, rape,
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.