Gujarat HC Quashes Convictions Of 9 Accused In 2003 Assault Case After Settlement During Appeals

The petitioners sought quashing of FIR C.R. No. I-73 of 2003, registered at Sami Police Station for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 326, 452, 323, 504 and 506(2) of the IPC and Section 135 of the BP Act.

After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and the petitioners were convicted of offences under Sections 324, 326, 452, 323 and 147 IPC and sentenced to three years’ simple imprisonment.

Their appeals were pending before the Sessions Court, which had suspended the sentences.

During the appeals, the parties settled the dispute; the complainant consented to quashing and stated that he did not wish to prosecute.

The application invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, and sought quashing of the FIR, consequential proceedings and conviction.

The Court relied on the inherent quashing principles stated in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303: the High Court’s power is distinct from statutory compounding, and may be exercised to secure the ends of justice or prevent abuse of process; in private disputes, quashing may be appropriate where the possibility of conviction is remote and continuation would cause injustice, but the nature and gravity of the offence must be considered.

It also applied State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, which permits quashing of non-compoundable offences of a predominantly private character after settlement, while excluding heinous offences and requiring consideration of relevant circumstances, including the accused’s antecedents and conduct.

The judgment states that such proceedings may be quashed even after conviction where an appeal is pending.

The Court accepted that the dispute was private, that the parties had voluntarily settled it without coercion, and that the complainant no longer wished to prosecute.

It considered the offences not so serious that quashing would override the public interest, and concluded that continuing the proceedings would serve no useful purpose and would amount to an abuse of process.

Applying the principles in Gian Singh and Laxmi Narayan, it held that the pending appeals and the prior conviction did not prevent quashing in the circumstances of this case.

It directed the Sessions Judge, Patan, to pass an appropriate order in the pending Criminal Appeal Nos. 182 of 2024 and 177 of 2024; the rule was made absolute to that extent.