![Continuation Of Criminal Proceedings After Compromise Cause Oppression & Prejudice To Parties Says Prayagraj HC [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2019/11/lj_8255_Continuation_Of_Criminal_Proceedings_After_Compromise_Cause_Oppression_&_Prejudice_To_Parties_Says_Allahabad_HC.jpg)
The Prayagraj High Court on October 30, 2019, in the case of Smt. Gomti Devi And Others v. State of U.P. and Another, has held that after parties enter into a compromise/settlement continuation of criminal proceedings would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned.
The single-judge Bench of Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh was hearing an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing the charge sheet as well as criminal proceedings arising out of a case filed under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, against the opposite party.
The applicant submitted before the court that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end and in respect to that continuance of criminal proceedings between the parties would be a futile exercise, therefore, same is liable to be quashed by this Court. This submission was not disputed by the opposite party.
After hearing both the parties, the court observed that The inherent jurisdiction of this Court may be suitably exercised if the parties inter-se have mutually decided to bury the hatchet and settle the matter amicably in between them in a criminal litigation emanating from such dispute which are quintessentially of civil nature and other criminal litigations, which do not have grave and deleterious social fall-outs.
Thus accepting the application, the court said that,
"After compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. "
