Madras High Court: In a criminal original petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (‘CrPC’), G. Jayachandran, J. has said that CrPC provides for bargain or plead guilty or compound. By-passing the procedures and quashing criminal prosecution, by obtaining an apology letter for an act of violence inside the college campus by the teaching staff is not in the interest of justice. Hence, the Court dismissed to quash petition, and allowed the accused to approach the Trial Court and seek remedy either by resorting to plead bargain or compounding.
Background:
The teaching staff and non-teaching staff gathered and protested voluntarily against the management of the college and prevented other staff from attending duty. This has led to the registration of a complaint for offences under Sections 143, 147, 448, 341, 342 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code, 1860 (‘IPC’). After completion of the investigation, a final report has been filed against 39 persons. Thus, the present petition was filed to quash the case on the ground that some of the accused persons approached this court with similar prayer and this court has allowed that quash petition after getting affidavit of apology.
Analysis and Order:
The Court said that when the specific overt act attracting prosecution for criminal offence been made out by the prosecution, if at all the accused wants to plead guilty, it should be done in the manner known to law under Section 482 of CrPC. An affidavit of apology cannot be entertained to quash the prosecution launched for offence of this kind.
The Court said that CrPC provides for bargain or plead guilty or compound. By-passing the procedures and quashing criminal prosecution, by obtaining an apology letter for an act of violence inside the college campus by the teaching staff is not in the interest of justice. Hence, the Court dismissed to quash petition.
The Court, while dismissing the petition, allowed the accused to approach the Trial Court and seek remedy either by resorting to plead bargain or compounding.
[Dr. T.V.Swaminathan v. State, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 2559, decided on 13-06-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For Petitioners: Advocate N. Elayaraja
For Respondents: Government Advocate S. Udaya Kumar