LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

rajvinder singh (advocate)     24 September 2009

compromise 304-a, 279

sir ,accused driver killed 26 years old man while driving.FIR was registerd and now Challan (173 CRPC)hve been presented in court.
the brother of deceased is complainant he agrees to compromise and to get 2 lac from accused (my client)
now though the offence is noncompoundable does the FIR can be quashed at High Court u/s482 crpc.
pls provide my the authorities in suppport of it.
further sir pls tell me that in case compromise is made out does i have to mention the amount in the compromise which will be presented before high court pls guide me about the compromise deed how it will be drafted,only few guidlines so that i may develop it



Learning

 2 Replies

Swami Sadashiva Brahmendra Sar (Nil)     24 September 2009

Yes, for solution, High Court should be approached under s 482. Kindly see my Article on this point on following link of LCI: 

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/article_list_detail.asp?article_id=1540&article_title=94.Compromise%20in%20non%20compoundable%20cases

 

s.chakravarthy (self)     28 September 2009

copromise can take place even prior to filing of FIR or before taking cognizance . Composition is of the offence and not merely the proceedings pending before the Court. Termination of proceedings is the consequence of the composition and it has to be held that composition is of the offences alleged. Offences are committed even before the complaint/F.I.R. is filed and cognizance is taken only later by a Court. The composition of the offence can therefore certainly take place even prior to the filing of the complaint/F.I.R. and cognizance being taken by the Court. It can take place at any time after the commission of the offence.A person becomes an accused not merely when the final report/complaint is filed. The accused is a person who is accused of an offence. In that view of the matter, his status as an accused arises from the point of commission of the offence and thereafter when allegations of commission of crime are raised against him. The expression 'accused' in S.320(8) Cr.P.C. can hence only refer to the status of the person vis-a-vis the offence and it must be held to have nothing to do with his formal indictment before a Court. It cannot be contended that he becomes an accused only after cognizance is taken and, consequently, that composition can be only after cognizance is taken by a Court. Such a conclusion cannot obviously be drawn from the use of the expression 'accused' in S.320(8) Cr.P.C.

the following citations are relevant=

Madan Mohan Abbot Vs State of Punjab- 2008 (4) SCC 582

Nikhil Merchant Vs .CBI - 2008(9)SCC 677

Manoj Shrama Vs State- 2008(11) JT 674

 


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register