City
Epaper

Punishment not sole form of delivering justice, says SC

By IANS | Updated: September 29, 2021 20:35 IST

New Delhi, Sep 29 The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that handing out punishments is not the sole ...

Open in App

New Delhi, Sep 29 The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that handing out punishments is not the sole form of delivering justice, as it quashed criminal proceedings and set aside the conviction of the accused in two appeals.

A bench of Chief Justice N.V. Ramana and Justice Surya Kant, observed that criminal proceedings involving non-heinous offences or where the offences are predominantly of a private nature, can be annulled, irrespective of the fact that the trial has already been concluded or appeal against conviction stands dismissed.

"Handing out punishment is not the sole form of delivering justice. Societal method of applying laws evenly is always subject to lawful exceptions," it said.

The bench said the high court, noting the nature of the offence and the fact that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the victim has willingly consented to the nullification of criminal proceedings, can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the CrPC, even if the offences are non-compoundable.

The bench emphasised that the touchstone for exercising the extraordinary power under Section 482 would be to secure the ends of justice. However, grave offences, or offences which involve moral turpitude or have a harmful effect on the social and moral fabric of the society, cannot be construed betwixt two individuals or groups only, as they have the potential to impact the society at large, it noted.

The top court said the high court can "adopt a pragmatic approach, to ensure that the felony, even if goes unpunished, does not tinker with or paralyse the very object of the administration of criminal justice system".

It emphasised powers of the high court, under Section 482 of the CrPC, and the Supreme Court, under Article 142 of the Constitution, ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings.

"In doing so, due regard must be given to the overarching objective of sentencing in the criminal justice system, which is grounded on the sublime philosophy of maintenance of peace of the collective and that the rationale of placing an individual behind bars is aimed at his reformation," it noted.

The top court invoked powers under Article 142 and quashed criminal proceedings and consequently set aside the conviction in both the appeals, against the Madhya Pradesh High Court and Karnataka High Court verdicts, where the non-compoundable offences were not compounded, even after the parties had reached a settlement.

Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor

Tags: Surya KantMadhya Pradesh High CourtSupreme CourtJudge of madhya pradesh high courtJustice surya kant
Open in App

Related Stories

MaharashtraSupreme Court Allows Sunil Shukla to Approach Bombay HC Seeking FIR Against Raj Thackeray, Derecognition of MNS Party

Mumbai2006 Mumbai Train Blasts Case: Supreme Court Stays Bombay High Court Order Acquitting 12 Accused

NationalSupreme Court Asks MEA to Trace Russian Woman and Return Child's Custody To Father

NationalRecording Phone calls Is Not Violation of Privacy in Marital Disputes, Says SC

NationalSupreme Court Issues Notice to Bihar and Delhi Governments Over Minor Girl's Plea Against Forced Child Marriage

International Realted Stories

InternationalStorm Floris batters northern UK with dangerous winds, heavy rain

InternationalPakistan's real power centre: Asim Munir's military rule in civilians' clothing (IANS Analysis)

InternationalEAM Jaishankar urges global participation of Indians in 'Har Ghar Tiranga' ahead of 79th Independence Day

InternationalEAM Jaishankar calls on Philippines President in New Delhi

InternationalSouth Korea to resume inter-Korean projects when contact with North is reestablished: Minister