Law Insider India

Legal News, Current Trends and Legal Insight | Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Himachal Pradesh HC: S.320 CrPC not Bar to Power U/S 482 for Quashing Non Compoundable Offences in Appropriate Cases

2 min read

Sowmiya Rajendrakumar

Published on: August 8, 2022 at 19:12 IST

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has reiterated that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice quashing of FIR is necessary, then Section 320 of CrPC would not be a bar to exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code qua non-compoundable offences.

Justice Bhushan Barowalia
noted: “If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is well settled that the powers under section 482 have no limits. Of course, where there is more power, it becomes necessary to exercise utmost care and caution while invoking such powers.”

The Petitioner had sought quashing of an FIR registered against him under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC. The complainant had alleged that the Petitioner abused his mother in law. The parties having entered into a compromise, the Petitioner argued that no purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings pending.

The Deputy Advocate General argued that the offence is not compoundable, so the petition may be dismissed.

Court relied on the Apex Court judgment in BS Joshi & ors. v State of Haryana and anr. Wherein it was held that if for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is well settled that the powers under section 482 have no limits.

Reliance was also placed on Jitendra Raghuvanshi and others VS. Babita Raghuvanshi and another, where it was held that the “inherent powers” of the High Court

under Section 482 of the Code are wide and unfettered and may be exercised to quash criminal proceedings where dispute is of a private nature and a compromise is entered into between the parties who are willing to settle their differences amicably.

Court said that even if, the trial is allowed to be continued, as the parties have compromised the matter, there are bleak chances of conviction to secure the ends of justice. Thus, interest of justice will be met, in case, the proceedings are quashed, as the parties have already compromised the matter, court said.