Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.19 seconds)
Rupinder Singh Alias Pinki vs State Of Punjab on 6 April, 2026 cites

Ramgopal & Anr vs State Of M.P.& Anr on 30 July, 2010

6. In the present case, after conviction of the petitioner, better sense HITESH 2026.04.09 15:32 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document/judgment High Court, Chandigarh CRR-1829-2012 (O&M) -3 has already prevailed on the parties and they have already executed a compromise deed (Annexure A-1). Even, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of "Ramgopal and Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh", reported as 2021 (4) (RCR) (Crl) Page 322 has observed that even inherent powers can be exercised, even after conviction of the accused by the Courts and the relevant extract of the said judgment has been reproduced below:-
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 1800 - Full Document

Sube Singh & Another vs State Of Haryana & Another on 17 November, 2011

10.From the scheme of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it is apparent that the offences, which are non-compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C cannot be compounded by a Criminal Court, However, Section 320 Cr.P.C is not an embargo against invoking inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The High Court, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and for justifiable reasons can exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to prevent abuse of the process of any court, or to secure the end of justice. Thus, the High Court can quash such proceedings in exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., even if the offences are non- compoundable. In so far as power of quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is concerned, it is guided by the material on record as to whether the ends of justice would justify such exercise of power, even though the ultimate consequence may be acquittal of the accused. The Division Bench of this Court in "Sube Singh and another Vs. State of Haryana and another, CRM-M-38140-2011, decided on 09.04.2013" has observed that non-acceptance of the compromise would also lead to denial of complete justice, which is the very essence of our justice delivery system. Since, there is no statutory embargo against invoking of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., after conviction of an accused by the trial court and during the pendency of appeal against such conviction, the High Court could invoke the inherent jurisdiction and strike down the proceedings subject to certain safeguards.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 2251 - R Singh - Full Document
1