JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) When the special leave petition in Gian Singh v. State of
Punjab and another came up for hearing, a two-Judge Bench (Markandey Katju
and Gyan Sudha Misra, JJ. ) doubted the correctness of the decisions of this
Court in
B. S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, 2003 4 SCC 675
Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, 2008 9 SCC 677
and
Manoj Sharma v. State and others, 2008 16 SCC 1
and referred the matter to a larger Bench. The
reference order reads as follows:
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.
The petitioner has been convicted under Section 420 and
Section 120B, IPC by the learned Magistrate. He filed an appeal
challenging his conviction before the learned Sessions Judge.
While his appeal was pending, he filed an application before the
learned Sessions Judge for compounding the offence, which,
according to the learned counsel, was directed to be taken up
along with the main appeal. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a
petition under Section 482, Cr. P. C. for quashing of the FIR on
the ground of compounding the offence. That petition under
Section 482 Cr. P. C. has been dismissed by the High Court by its
impugned order. Hence, this petition has been filed in this
Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on three
decisions of this Court, all by two Judge Benches. They are
B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana, 2003 4 SCC 675
;
Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another, 2008 9 SCC 677
;
and
Manoj Sharma vs. State and Others, 2008 16 SCC 1
. In these
decisions, this Court has indirectly permitted compounding of
non-compoundable offences. One of us, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
Markandey Katju, was a member to the last two decisions.
Section 320, Cr. P. C. mentions certain offences as
compoundable, certain other offences as compoundable with the
permission of the Court, and the other offences as non-
compoundable vide Section 320(7).
Section 420, IPC, one of the counts on which the
petitioner has been convicted, no doubt, is a compoundable
offence with permission of the Court in view of Section 320,
Cr. P. C. but Section 120B IPC, the other count on which the
petitioner has been convicted, is a non-compoundable offence.
Section 120B (Criminal conspiracy) is a separate offence and
since it is a non-compoundable offence, we cannot permit it to
be compounded.
The Court cannot amend the statute and must maintain
judicial restraint in this connection. The Courts should not try
to take over the function of the Parliament or executive. It is
the legislature alone which can amend Section 320 Cr. P. C.
We are of the opinion that the above three decisions
require to be re-considered as, in our opinion, something which
cannot be done directly cannot be done indirectly. In our, prima
facie, opinion, non-compoundable offences cannot be permitted to
be compounded by the Court, whether directly or indirectly.
Hence, the above three decisions do not appear to us to be
correctly decided.
It is true that in the last two decisions, one of us,
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Markandey Katju, was a member but a Judge
should always be open to correct his mistakes. We feel that
these decisions require re-consideration and hence we direct
that this matter be placed before a larger Bench to reconsider
the correctness of the aforesaid three decisions.
Let the papers of this case be placed before Hon'ble Chief
Justice of India for constituting a larger Bench. "
(2.) This is how these matters have come up for consideration before
us.
(3.) Two provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for
short, 'Code') which are vital for consideration of the issue referred to
the larger Bench are Sections 320 and 482. Section 320 of the Code provides
for compounding of certain offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code,
1860 (for short, 'IPC'). It reads as follows:
"S. 320. Compounding of offences. (1) The offences punishable
under the sections of the Indian Penal Code, (45 of 1860)
specified in the first two columns of the Table next following
may be compounded by the persons mentioned in the third column
of that Table: ;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.