Partial Compromise With Some Accused In Criminal Case Not Allowed, Victim Can't Be Driver Of Criminal Justice System: Punjab & Haryana HC
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that partial compromise with some accused in a criminal case, where there are multiple accused persons, cannot be allowed.
A division bench of Justice Sureshwar Thakur and Justice Sudeepti Sharma said, "To ensure that the victim/complainant, does not become the driver of the criminal justice system, through makings of piecemeal settlements, thereupons the Courts are required to be not accepting any piecemeal settlements, rather are required to be rejecting piecemeal settlements, nor they are required to be making piecemeal orders for the composition of offence."
Observing that "there is no explicit guidelines governing the issue" a single judge had referred the question- whether partial compromise constitute ground for quashing of FIR only qua some of the accused- to the larger bench.
The single judge had expressed concern that partial quashing of criminal proceedings, on the strength of partial compromise, elevate the status of victim from that of a stakeholder to that of a driver of the criminal justice system?
Answering the first question in negative, the Court illustrated that a piecemeal settlement between the complainant or victim and some of the accused would be in conflict with the mandate of Section 223 (what persons may be charged jointly) of the CrPC, which now has been replaced by Section 246 of the BNSS.
The Court highlighted conflicts and "ill-situation" which could result from partial compromise in the case.
The bench gave example of cases of vicarious liability and said if the case is compromised with the principal offender then accessory in the crime or only those who destroyed the evidence will be left to face the trial.
It stated further that those accused with whom compromise was not made, may argue that the trial was initiated "only to harass and humiliate" and humiliate them.
“Naturally the proceedings in trial launched against the accused, who are left to be joined in the settlement, may ultimately become concluded to become embarked with the vice qua therebys there being not only an abuse of the process of law, but also the said proceedings being potentialized only to harass and humiliate the said accused,” added the Court.
The bench concluded that the High Court should exercise "self-restraint" in accepting piece meal settlements.
Title: Rakesh Das v. State of Haryana and another [along with other connected matters]