Law should not stand in the way of genuine reconciliation and revival of harmonious relationship between litigants. Therefore, the courts are expected to take a balanced and holistic approach without emphasising merely on punitive aspects while dealing with criminal cases arising out of sensitive issues that could affect family and social relations, the Madras High Court Bench here has said.
Justice S. Vimala made the observation while quashing a criminal case registered against a family under Section 498A (husband or relative of husband of a woman subjecting her to cruelty) of the IPC on the basis of a compromise reached between the complainant and the accused. The judge quashed the case although the penal provision had been listed under non-compoundable offences under the code.
“An argument against compounding the offence is that the permission to compound would amount to legal recognition of violence against women and that the factum of reconciliation cannot be a justifiable ground to legally condone the violence. The acceptance of such an argument would imply that the priority of law should be to… inflict punishment irrespective of the desire to patch up the differences,” the judge said.
She said the Law Commission in its 154{+t}{+h}report submitted to the Centre in 1996 and the 177{+t}{+h}report submitted in 2001 had recommended inclusion of Section 498A in the list of offences that were compoundable with the permission of the court. Justice Malimath Committee Report on Reforms of Criminal Justice System strongly supported the plea to make Section 498A compoundable.
The view was reflected in the Union Home Ministry’s 111{+t}{+h}Report on the Criminal Law (Amendment) Bill, 2003 and several decisions of the Supreme Court which recognised the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash criminal proceedings if the latter considered that possibility of conviction in a criminal case was remote and bleak in view of a compromise reached between the complainant and the accused.
