Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Sheshrao Jadhav, was the sole accused in Criminal Case RCC No. 84/2021 arising from Crime No. 696/2020 registered at Police Station Barshitakli, Akola, for offences under Sections 354, 354-A, 452, 504, and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The informant, Shilpa Jadhav, is the wife of the applicant's younger brother. The incident allegedly occurred on 10 December 2020 when the informant was alone at home with her minor daughter; the applicant entered, caught her from behind, and touched her breast. She escaped, raised a protest, and later lodged a report on 12 December 2020. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed, and the trial commenced. The prosecution examined three witnesses, including the informant, whose evidence supported the case, while the other two witnesses gave hearsay evidence. At this stage, the parties arrived at a compromise, and the applicant filed this application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) seeking quashing of the criminal proceedings. The informant appeared in person and confirmed the settlement voluntarily. The primary legal issue was whether the High Court could exercise its inherent powers to quash non-compoundable offences after evidence had been recorded. The Court noted that the offences under Sections 354, 354-A, 452, 504, and 506 IPC are not heinous and are primarily against the individual. The compromise was genuine and voluntary, and the relationship between the parties was familial. The Court held that continuing the trial would be futile as the chances of conviction were remote, and quashing would serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the Court allowed the application and quashed RCC No. 84/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barshitakli, Akola.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Non-Compoundable Offences - The Court considered whether inherent powers can be invoked to quash proceedings for offences under Sections 354, 354-A, 452, 504, 506 IPC after evidence recording, based on compromise. The Court held that where the settlement is genuine, voluntary, and the chances of conviction are remote, the High Court may quash proceedings even for non-compoundable offences, as the ends of justice require such exercise. (Paras 3-8) B) Indian Penal Code - Sexual Assault - Sections 354, 354-A IPC - Compromise in Non-Compoundable Offences - The informant (sister-in-law) and accused (elder brother) settled their dispute after recording of evidence. The Court noted that the offences are not heinous and the relationship between parties is familial. Held that quashing is permissible to prevent abuse of process and secure ends of justice. (Paras 4-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash criminal proceedings for non-compoundable offences after recording of evidence, based on a compromise between the parties.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the application and quashed RCC No. 84/2021 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Barshitakli, Akola, arising out of Crime No. 696/2020.
Law Points
- Inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC can be exercised to quash non-compoundable offences if compromise is genuine
- voluntary
- and unlikely to result in conviction
- settlement after recording of evidence does not bar quashing if chances of conviction are remote
- Section 354
- 354-A
- 452
- 504
- 506 IPC are not heinous offences warranting refusal of compromise.
