Can FIR Be Quashed Partially Based On Compromise Between Victim And Some Accused: SC To Decide
The Supreme Court has agreed to consider whether an FIR can be partially quashed based on a compromise between the informant and one or some of the accused.
The matter arises from a petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) by an accused who was implicated through the statement of a co-accused but not named in the original FIR.
The Bench of Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti said, "The issue to be considered here is whether on the basis of the compromise reached between the informant and the petitioner (one of the accused), on 02.06.2023 (Annexure P-2), the quashment of the FIR on the petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should have been ordered by the Court. In this case, the petitioner was not named in the FIR and was roped in on the basis of the statement by a co-accused (Krishan Soni)."
During the hearing, AOR Pranjal Kishore, appearing for the petitioner, submitted that a compromise between the informant and the petitioner had been reached on June 2, 2023. The petitioner sought quashing of the FIR based on this agreement. The counsel pointed out conflicting decisions by various High Courts on whether a case can be partially quashed when a compromise involves only some of the accused.
The Bench took note of the legal inconsistency, referring to a chart highlighting divergent High Court rulings on the issue. "On the legal aspect, the counsel draws the attention of the Court to the chart at “Page-D” to point out that different High Courts had taken contrary positions on the issue as to whether, on the face of compromise with one or few of the accused in the case, the case can be part quashed by the Court," the Court noted.
Issuing notice to the parties, the Court made it returnable within six weeks. Meanwhile, the Court allowed the trial to continue but directed that proceedings against the petitioner be kept in abeyance until further orders. "Issue notice, returnable in six weeks. In the meantime, the trial may continue but not qua the petitioner," the Court ordered.
Cause Title: Puneet Kumar @ Punit Kumar v. State of Haryana and Others [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 17731/2024]
Appearance:-
Petitioner: Advocates Aman Bansal, Madiya Mushtaq, Pranjal Kishore (AOR)
Click here to read/download the Order
