LexXYZ versus THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 11 S.C.R. 792 : 2024 INSC 869 XYZ v. The State of Gujarat & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 4463 of 2024) 5 November 2024 [Abhay S. Oka* and Augustine George Masih, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences can be quashed on the ground of settlement. Headnotes† Criminal law – Quashing of criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences by High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of the Constitution of India on the ground of settlement – Advisable to procure presence of victim either personally or through video conferencing: Held: When petitions are filed before the High Court by invoking either Article 226 of the Constitution of India or Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing of criminal proceedings of non-compoundable offences on the ground of settlement, the High Court must satisfy itself that there is a genuine settlement between the victim and the accused – Without the Court being satisfied with the existence of a genuine settlement, the petition for quashing cannot proceed further – If the Court is satisfied about the existence of a genuine settlement, the other question to be considered is whether in the facts of the case, the power of quashing deserves to be exercised – Even if an affidavit of the victim accepting the settlement is on record, in cases of serious offences and especially against women, it is always advisable to procure the presence of the victim either personally or through video conference so that the Court can properly examine whether there is a genuine settlement and that the victim has no subsisting grievance. [Para 7] Affidavit by illiterate person: Held: When illiterate persons affirm such affidavits for settlement by putting their thumb impressions, usually, the affidavit must bear * Author [2024] 11 S.C.R. 793 XYZ v. The State of Gujarat & Anr. an endorsement that the contents of the affidavit were explained to the person affirming the same. [Para 7] Criminal law – Procedure to be adopted by High Court for quashing criminal proceedings on the ground of settlement: Held: The Complainant may file an Affidavit on the aspect of settlement before the High Court – After considering all the relevant materials, if necessary, the High Court can always order an inquiry to be held by a Judicial Officer on the question of whether there was a settlement between the victim and the accused and whether the affidavits were affirmed after explaining the contents thereof to the victim – If the High Court finds that there was, in fact, a settlement arrived between the victim and the accused, the High Court will have to consider the question of whether the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of the Constitution can be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings based on compromise. [Paras 13, 14] List of Acts Criminal Procedure Code, 1973; Penal Code, 1860. List of Keywords Quashing of non-compoundable offences; Quashing on the ground of settlement. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 4463 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 29.09.2023 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in CRMA No. 15041 of 2023 Appearances for Parties Ms. Indira Jaising, Sr. Adv., Paras Nath Singh, Rohin Bhatt, Sadeeq UR Rahman, Advs. for the Appellant. Ms. Ruchi Kohli, Rakesh Khanna, Sr. Advs., Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Ms. Devyani Bhatt, Ms. Abhipsa Mohanty, Ms. Shrishti Mishra, Rakesh Malhotra, Ms. Savita Singh, Kushal Malhotra, Advs. for the Respondents. 794 [2024] 11 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Abahy S. Oka, J. 1. Leave granted. FACTUAL DETAILS 2. The appellant is the first informant. A First Information Report was registered at the instance of the appellant for the offences punishable under Sections 376(2)(N) and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘the IPC’). The offences under Section 3(1)(R), 3(1)(w) and 3(2)(5) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short, ‘the Atrocities Act’) were also alleged. The second respondent is the accused named in the FIR. A charge sheet was filed against the second respondent for the said offences. 3. The second respondent filed a petition before the High Court for quashing the charge sheet based on the settlement allegedly arrived at between the parties. The High Court, by the impugned j
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.