Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
In the matter of Yashpal Chaudhrani & Ors. V. State the Delhi HC dealing with a bunch of petitions invoking the inherent power of court under Sec 482 of CrPC to seek quashing of criminal proceedings on account of “settlement” of dispute between parties. The court in the above matter held that the permissibility of law must be ascertained before referring such cases for mediation. The court stating two essentials: One being offence involved must be compoundable or because HC would have no inhibition to quash it.
The single bench of Justice R.K. Gauba while framing the guideline for reference of criminal cases to mediation & others ADR methods held that the mediator must undertake preliminary scrutiny of facts of the criminal case and satisfy himself as to the possibility of assisting the parties to such as settlement would be acceptable to the court, bearing in mind the law governing the compounding of offences or exercise of power of HC under Sec 482 of CrPC.
The court framed guideline with aim of achieving consistency and uniformity in approach of mediation centers. It notes that it hopes and expects that these will serve as guidelines which criminal courts and mediation centers shall follow in future. The court dismissed all the five petitions before it while coming heavy on the authorities for completely ignoring the rules and guidelines while referring cases to mediation. The court said that references failed to comply with Supreme Court guidelines over the exercise of power under Section 482 of CrPC.
The court further noted that the manner in which the accused persons in the "credit card fraud" cases have played with the procedure, absenting at will, reappearing at their convenience, then requests being granted just for the asking, leaves one with the impression that no one was interested in taking the cases forward. It said that these cases reflect a "most irresponsible way of handling a criminal court bordering on abdication."
The Court in its order held that “No judge can shun judicial work during court hours for administrative work and the judicial business should be the priority.” It further acknowledged and emphasized the need for creation of additional criminal courts so that each courts carries only optimum number of cases. The bench instructed Chief metropolitan magistrate, New Delhi to take up matters on day to day basis till they reach final conclusion and directed sessions judge to monitor progress of cases and ensure that such cases are decided within 6 months of date of receipt.
86540
103860
630
114
59824