In Brief
The Supreme Court reversed the High Court's quashing of a criminal case involving attempt to murder (Section 307 IPC) where the accused obtained a settlement with the injured complainant. The Court held that serious, non-compoundable offences like attempt to murder cannot be quashed merely on settlement; they are crimes against society, not private disputes. While Section 482 Cr.P.C. permits quashing in cases with civil character (commercial, matrimonial), serious offences require courts to examine the nature of injuries, weapons used, medical evidence, timing of settlement, and accused's criminal history. The settlement here occurred during investigation, the accused used firearms and caused serious injuries, and were absconding, making quashing improper. Compromises in violent crime cases are insufficient grounds to prevent trial.", "cited_cases"> [ { "raw_citation": "(2014) 6 SCC 466", "case_name": "Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab", "cited_year": "2014", "paragraph": "1, 9.3, 12", "treatment": "distinguished", "treatment_by": "this_court", "treatment_quote": "However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. ... However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation." }, { "raw_citation": "(2014) 4 SCC 149", "case_name": "State of Rajasthan v. Shambhu Kewat", "cited_year": "2014", "paragraph": "1, 12", "treatment": "referred", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2011) 10 SCC 705", "case_name": "Shiji @ Pappu & others v. Radhika and another", "cited_year": "2011", "paragraph": "2, 9, 11, 11.1", "treatment": "distinguished", "treatment_by": "this_court", "treatment_quote": "Therefore, the said decision may be applicable in a case which has its origin in the civil dispute between the parties; the parties have resolved the dispute; that the offence is not against the society at large and/or the same may not have social impact; the dispute is a family/matrimonial dispute etc. The aforesaid decision may not be applicable in a case where the offences alleged are very serious and grave offences, having a social impact like offences under Section 307 IPC. Therefore, without proper application of mind to the relevant facts and circumstances, in our view, the High Court has materially erred in mechanically quashing the FIR, by observing that in view of the compromise, there are no chances of recording conviction and/or the further trial would be an exercise in futility." }, { "raw_citation": "(2012) 10 SCC 303", "case_name": "Gian Singh v. State of Punjab", "cited_year": "2012", "paragraph": "6.4, 9.2", "treatment": "relied", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2014) 10 SCC 285", "case_name": "State of Madhya Pradesh v. Deepak", "cited_year": "2014", "paragraph": "6.4, 9.6", "treatment": "relied", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2015) 8 SCC 307", "case_name": "State of Madhya Pradesh v. Manish", "cited_year": "2015", "paragraph": "6.4, 9.5", "treatment": "relied", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2016) 12 SCC 179", "case_name": "J. Ramesh Kamath v. Mohana Kurup", "cited_year": "2016", "paragraph": "6.4", "treatment": "referred", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2016) 12 SCC 471", "case_name": "State of Madhya Pradesh v. Rajveer Singh", "cited_year": "2016", "paragraph": "6.4", "treatment": "referred", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2017) 9 SCC 641", "case_name": "Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat", "cited_year": "2017", "paragraph": "6.4, 9.4", "treatment": "relied", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "2019 SCC Online SC 7", "case_name": "State of Madhya Pradesh v. Kalyan Singh", "cited_year": "2019", "paragraph": "6.4, 9.6", "treatment": "referred", "treatment_by": "this_court" }, { "raw_citation": "(2014) 15 SCC 29", "case_name": "State of Maharashtra v. Vikram Anantrai Doshi", "cited_year": "2014", "paragraph": "9.1", "treatment": "referred", "treatment_by": "this_court" } ]
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.