Criminal Justice System Must Not Be A Casualty Of Compromise: J&K High Court Flags Routine Quashing Of FIRs Based On Settlement Between Parties

Emphasising the critical role of the criminal justice system in upholding societal order the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has recently ruled that criminal cases should not be routinely dismissed merely on the basis of mutual settlements between parties, as this could potentially lead to the erosion of the justice system.Addressing a petition seeking the quashing of an FIR on the ground of the parties who had resolved their dispute amicably, a bench of Justice Mohammad Yousuf Wani observed, “In case, the FIR's and the criminal cases culminating from the investigations are allowed to be quashed on the wishes of the complainant, the criminal justice system is likely to become a causality and the society at large will have to bear the consequences”,. The case stemmed from a dispute between the petitioner, Ashok Kumar, and respondent Suman Devi whereafter an FIR was lodged at Police Station under Sections 294 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). It was claimed that the case arose from a civil dispute between the petitioner's father and the respondent, which escalated, leading to the filing of the FIR. Subsequently, the parties reached an amicable settlement, documented in a written agreement, and sought the quashing of the FIR on the grounds that the matter had been resolved.Assailing the FIR the petitioner argued that the dispute had been amicably settled between the parties, and thus, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would be unjust. The petitioner also cited several precedents where courts, including the Supreme Court of India, quashed criminal proceedings that were the result of personal disputes, especially when a mutual settlement was reached.Adjudicating the matter Justice Mohammad Wani underscored the importance of a robust criminal justice system and noted that while the law does allow for the quashing of FIRs in exceptional cases where disputes have been resolved amicably, this power must be exercised with caution. Expressing concern that if criminal cases, especially those resulting from thorough investigations, are routinely quashed based on the wishes of the complainant, the court pointed out that the integrity of the criminal justice system could be compromised. This, in turn, could have far-reaching consequences for society as a whole, it added. Referring to the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and its corresponding section in the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Justice Wani highlighted that these provisions limit but do not entirely restrict the Court's power to quash criminal proceedings in exceptional circumstances. However, the Court emphasized that such power should not be exercised in a manner that circumvents the legal process.Citing the Supreme Court's ruling in "Gopalkumar B. Nair vs CBI" (2014), which allowed for the quashing of non-compoundable offences following a settlement between the parties, provided it was done with due caution the Court also referred to a recent judgment by the Gauhati High Court in "Professor Diganta Kumar Das vs State of Assam and Another" (2023), which aligned with the principles of careful judicial discretion in such matters.After recording its cautionary note that the quashing of FIRs based on settlements should remain an exception the court allowed the petition, quashing the criminal proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate after taking note of the mutual settlement reduced in writing. Case Title: Ashok Kumar Vs UT of J&K Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 240Click Here To Read/Download Judgment

Criminal Justice System Must Not Be A Casualty Of Compromise: J&K High Court Flags Routine Quashing Of FIRs Based On Settlement Between Parties

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags