Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, who are the accused in Crime No.719/2015 registered at Peenya Police Station for an offence punishable under Section 337 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, filed a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the FIR and all criminal proceedings. The case arose from a complaint filed by the second respondent alleging that the petitioners caused hurt by a rash act. During the pendency of the petition, the parties entered into a compromise and the second respondent filed an affidavit stating that he had no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. The court considered whether the offence under Section 337 IPC, which is compoundable with the permission of the court, could be quashed on the basis of settlement. The court noted that the injury was simple in nature and that the parties had amicably settled the matter. Relying on the principle that continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the court allowed the petition and quashed the FIR and all proceedings.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Quashing of FIR - Section 482 CrPC - Compounding of Offence - Offence under Section 337 IPC is compoundable with permission of court - Where parties have amicably settled the dispute and complainant has no objection, continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process of law - Held that FIR and all proceedings are quashed (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings under Section 337 r/w 34 IPC can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of settlement between the parties?
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The FIR in Crime No.719/2015 registered at Peenya Police Station and all criminal proceedings against the petitioners are quashed.
Law Points
- Section 337 IPC is compoundable with court permission
- Section 482 CrPC can be invoked to quash proceedings when parties settle
- simple hurt cases can be compounded
Case Details
2020 LawText (KAR) (11) 13
Criminal Petition No.6332/2015
C.V. Nagesh (Senior Counsel), K. Raghavendra (Advocate), Rashmi Jadhav (HCGP for R1), Sridhara T (Advocate for R2)
ABB India Ltd., Shylendra Kumar, Sadiq Ulla A.N.M, Sathyanarayana A
State of Karnataka, N.B. Amith Kumar
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal petition under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of FIR and criminal proceedings
Remedy Sought
Quashing of FIR in Crime No.719/2015 and all criminal proceedings
Filing Reason
Petitioners were arraigned as accused for offence under Section 337 r/w 34 IPC based on complaint by second respondent
Issues
Whether the FIR and criminal proceedings under Section 337 r/w 34 IPC can be quashed under Section 482 CrPC on the basis of settlement between the parties?
Submissions/Arguments
Learned Senior Counsel for petitioners argued that parties have amicably settled the dispute and second respondent has filed affidavit stating no objection to quashing
None appeared for respondent No.2
Ratio Decidendi
Where the offence under Section 337 IPC is compoundable with permission of court and the parties have settled the dispute, the High Court can exercise its inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings to prevent abuse of process of law.
Judgment Excerpts
The injury sustained by the complainant is simple in nature and the offence under Section 337 of IPC is compoundable with the permission of the Court.
In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuation of proceedings would be an abuse of process of law.
Procedural History
FIR registered as Crime No.719/2015 at Peenya Police Station for offence under Section 337 r/w 34 IPC. Petitioners filed Criminal Petition No.6332/2015 under Section 482 CrPC seeking quashing. During pendency, parties settled and second respondent filed affidavit. Court heard arguments and allowed petition on 30.11.2020.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 337, 34
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 482
