Magistrate's Direction for Police Inquiry Under Section 202 CrPC Is Valid; Petitioner Must Await Investigation Outcome: Bombay High Court Dismisses Advocate's Petition as Premature    |     Tribunal’s Compensation Exceeding Claimed Amount Found Just and Fair Under Motor Vehicles Act: No Deduction Errors Warrant Reduction: Gujrat High Court    |     When Two Accused Face Identical Charges, One Cannot Be Convicted While the Other is Acquitted: Supreme Court Emphasizes Principle of Parity in Acquittal    |     Supreme Court Limits Interim Protection for Financial Institutions, Modifies Order on FIRs Filed by Borrowers    |     Kerala High Court Grants Regular Bail in Methamphetamine Case After Delay in Chemical Analysis Report    |     No Sign of Recent Intercourse; No Injury Was Found On Her Body Or Private Parts: Gauhati High Court Acquits Two In Gang Rape Case    |     Failure to Disclose Relationship with Key Stakeholder Led to Setting Aside of Arbitral Award: Gujarat High Court    |     Strict Compliance with UAPA's 7-Day Timeline for Sanctions is Essential:  Supreme Court    |     PAT Teachers Entitled to Regularization from 2014, Quashes Prospective Regularization as Arbitrary: Himachal Pradesh High Court    |     Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Anonymity Protections for Victims in Sensitive Cases: Right to Privacy Prevails Over Right to Information    |     Certified Copy of Will Admissible Under Registration Act, 1908: Allahabad HC Dismisses Plea for Production of Original Will    |     Injuries on Non-Vital Parts Do Not Warrant Conviction for Attempt to Murder: Madhya Pradesh High Court Modifies Conviction Under Section 307 IPC to Section 326 IPC    |     Classification Based on Wikipedia Data Inadmissible; Tribunal to Reassess Using Actual Financial Records: PH High Court Orders Reconsideration of Wage Dispute    |     Mere Delay in Initiation Does Not Justify Reduction of Damages: Jharkhand High Court on Provident Fund Defaults    |     Legatee Can Continue Suit Without Probate, But Decree Contingent on Probate Approval: Orissa High Court    |     An Award that Shocks the Conscience of the Court Cannot Stand, Especially When Public Money is Involved: Calcutta HC Reduces Quantum by Half    |     Trademark Transaction Within Territoriality Principle Subject to Indian Tax Laws: Bombay High Court Dismisses Hindustan Unilever's Petition on Non-Deduction of TDS    |     Concealment of Material Facts Bars Relief under Article 226: SC Reprimands Petitioners for Lack of Bonafides    |     Without Determination of the Will's Genuineness, Partition is Impossible: Supreme Court on Liberal Approach to Pleading Amendments    |     Candidates Cannot Challenge a Selection Process After Participating Without Protest : Delhi High Court Upholds ISRO's Administrative Officer Recruitment    |     Invalid Bank Guarantee Invocation Found Fatal to Recovery Claim: Delhi High Court Dismisses GAIL’s Appeal    |     Adverse Remarks in APAR Recorded Without Objectivity and Likely Motivated by Bias: Delhi High Court Quashes Biased APAR Downgrade of CRPF Officer    |    

Reconciliation of Social Conflicts Paramount: High Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Under SCST Act

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajbir Sehrawat, has set a precedent by quashing criminal proceedings under the SC/ST Act and various IPC sections. This decision, dated 14th November 2023, came in the case of Sohan Lal & others v. State of Punjab & another, emphasizing the importance of reconciling social conflicts through legal means.

The petition, filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, sought to quash a criminal complaint registered at Police Station Sadar Abohar, District Fazilka, based on a mutual out-of-court compromise. The court noted the absence of any coercion or undue influence in reaching this settlement.

Justice Sehrawat remarked, “The ultimate aim, objective, and goal of a legal system is to reconcile the social conflicts,” underlining the judiciary’s role in resolving disputes that extend beyond two parties to impact society at large. This observation highlights the court’s progressive approach in handling cases involving social harmony and legal justice.

While recognizing the compromise between the disputing parties, the judgment also made a clear distinction between the nature of offences suitable for such settlements. It cited that grave offences involving governance, administration, or severe societal impact should not be compromised.

Referencing the precedent set by Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another (2012), the judgment elaborated on the High Court’s power to quash criminal proceedings in line with the inherent jurisdiction provided under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. The court acknowledged that while heinous crimes like murder, rape, and dacoity are unfit for quashing based on settlements, disputes with a predominantly civil nature can be resolved through compromise, especially if continuing the proceedings would result in injustice.

The legal fraternity has welcomed this judgment as a balanced approach towards resolving criminal disputes, emphasizing the importance of judicial discretion in the interest of societal harmony and justice. Advocates Harpreet Singh Jakhal, Gurpal Singh Dhillon, and Kiranjeet Kaur represented the petitioners and respondents in this landmark case, respectively.

This ruling is expected to set a precedent for future cases, where the nature and gravity of the offence, along with the interests of justice, play a crucial role in deciding the course of legal proceedings.

Date of Decision: 14th November, 2023

Sohan Lal & others VS State of Punjab & another   

Similar News