Supreme Court: Exercise Caution in Quashing Non-Compoundable Cases Based on Settlements

Add a comment

The Supreme Court has advised High Courts to carefully scrutinize settlements between victims and accused before quashing non-compoundable cases. The Court emphasized ensuring the settlement’s authenticity, especially in serious offences and those involving women.

A bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih observed that:

  • Genuine Settlement: High Courts must confirm the settlement’s genuineness before proceeding with quashing petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution or Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.
  • Presence of Victim: In serious cases, particularly offences against women, courts should summon the victim, either physically or virtually, to verify the settlement and confirm the absence of any grievance.

Background

The appeal was filed by a victim challenging the Gujarat High Court’s order quashing criminal proceedings based on an alleged settlement in a case involving charges of:

  • Repeated rape (Section 376(2)(n), IPC).
  • Violations under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

The victim denied agreeing to any settlement and contested the affidavit presented by the accused. The Supreme Court noted that the victim was illiterate, and the affidavits bore thumb impressions identified by her brother, lacking any endorsement that their contents were explained to her.

Supreme Court’s Observations

  1. Affidavit Validation: Without confirmation that the contents were explained to the illiterate victim, the High Court should have personally verified the settlement’s authenticity.
  2. Error in High Court’s Approach: The Supreme Court held that the High Court’s judgment was unsustainable as it failed to ensure the genuineness of the settlement.
  3. Restoration and Inquiry:
    The matter was remanded to the High Court.
  • The victim was directed to appear before the High Court to present her position.
  • The High Court was empowered to order an inquiry into the execution of the affidavits and verify if the thumb impressions were obtained without explaining the contents.

Next Steps

The High Court was instructed to determine whether a genuine settlement exists and, if so, decide whether powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of the Constitution should be exercised to quash the criminal proceedings.

Case Details:

XYZ v. State of Gujarat

Leave a comment