LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/ramawatar-vs-state-of-madhya-pradesh-20211025/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Ramawatar vs State of Madhya Pradesh

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
25 October 2021
Case No.
Criminal Appeal No. 1393 of 2011
Result
Allowed
Bench
N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant, Hima Kohli
Citation
[2021] 10 S.C.R. 499 : 2021 INSC 664
Supreme Court Reports [2021] 10 S.C.R. 499 : 2021 INSC 664
Headnote

Constitution of India: Art.142 – Prosecution case was that there was property dispute between the two neighbours appellant and complainant – Complaint was filed under SC/ST Act against the appellant that he abused complainant with repeated reference to her caste – Courts below convicted the appellant under SC/ST Act – In the instant appeal, complainant filed an application for compromise – Held: The record manifests that there was an undeniable pre-existing civil dispute between the parties – Thus, the genesis of the deprecated incident was civil/property dispute – Nothing on record indicated that either before or after the purported compromise, any untoward incident had transpired between the parties – Complainant, on her own free will, without any compulsion, entered into a compromise and wished to drop the criminal proceedings against the appellant – Appellant and the complainant were residents of the same village and lived in very close proximity to each other – They themselves had voluntarily settled their differences – Therefore, in order to avoid the revival of healed wounds, and to advance peace and harmony, it will be prudent to effectuate the settlement – By invoking the powers under Art.142, the instant criminal proceedings are quashed with the sole objective of doing complete justice between the parties – Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Compromise/Settlement. Constitution of India: Art.142 – Invocation of, for quashing of criminal proceedings involving non-heinous crime on the basis of a voluntary compromise between the complainant/victim and the accused – Held: When considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a ‘special statute’ would not refrain Supreme Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Art.142 of the Constitution or s.482 Cr.P.C. – Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482. Constitution of India: Art.142 – Powers to quash the proceedings, scope of – Ordinarily, when dealing with offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ST Act, the Court will be extremely circumspect in its approach – The SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes – Where it appears to the Court that the offence although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings – Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: Object of the Act – Held: The SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes – The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper-castes – The Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Arts.15,

Read the full headnote (12 more paragraphs)

17 and 21 of the Constitution, with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities – Constitution of India – Arts.15, 17 and 21. Allowing the appeal, the Court

HELD: 1. This Court or the High Court, as the case may be, after having given due regard to the nature of the offence and the fact that the victim/complainant has willingly entered into a settlement/compromise, can quash proceedings in exercise of their respective constitutional/inherent powers. However, the powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post-conviction matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. This is on the premise that an order of conviction does not attain finality till the accused has exhausted his/her legal remedies and the finality is sub-judice before an appellate court. The pendency of legal proceedings, be that may before the final Court, is sine-qua-non to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do complete justice. Conversely, where a settlement has ensued post the attainment of all legal remedies, the annulment of proceedings on the basis of a compromise would be impermissible. Such an embargo is necessitated to prevent the accused from gaining an indefinite leverage, for such a settlement/compromise will always be loaded with lurking suspicion about its bona fide. The purpose of these extra-ordinary powers is not to incentivise any hollowhearted agreements between the accused and the victim but to do complete justice by effecting genuine settlement(s). [Paras 10, 13][508-H; 509-A-D]

Ramgopal & Anr. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021

(11) SCALE 555 – affirmed.

2.1 Even though the powers of this Court under Article

142 are wide and far-reaching, the same cannot be exercised in a vacuum. True it is that ordinary statutes or any restrictions contained therein, cannot be constructed as a limitation on the Court’s power to do “complete justice”. However, this is not to say that this Court can altogether ignore the statutory provisions or other express prohibitions in law. In fact, the Court is obligated to take note of the relevant laws and will have to regulate the use of its power and discretion accordingly. [Para 14][509-D-E]

Supreme Court Bar Assn. v. Union of India & Anr. (1998) 4 SCC 409 : [1998] 2 SCR 795 – followed.

2.2 Ordinarily, when dealing with offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ST Act, the Court will be extremely circumspect in its approach. The SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper-castes. The Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution, with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities. [Para 15][510-C-E]

2.3 On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a ‘special statute’ would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C. In cases such as the present, the Courts ought to be even more vigilant to ensure that the complainant-victim has entered into the compromise on the volition of his/her free will and not on account of any duress. It cannot be understated that since members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe belong to the weaker sections of our country, they are more prone to acts of coercion, and therefore ought to be accorded a higher level of protection. If the Courts find even a hint of compulsion or force, no relief can be given to the accused party. What factors the Courts should consider, would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. [Paras 16, 18] [510-F-H; 511-C-E]

2.4 By invoking the powers under Article 142, the instant Criminal proceedings are quashed with the sole objective of doing complete justice between the parties for the reasons that: Firstly, the very purpose behind Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST is to deter caste-based insults and intimidations when they are used with the intention of demeaning a victim on account of he/she belonging to the Scheduled Caste/ Scheduled Tribe community. In the present case, the record manifests that there was an undeniable pre-existing civil dispute between the parties. Considering this aspect, it would not be incorrect to categorise the occurrence as one being overarchingly private in nature, having only subtle undertones of criminality, even though the provisions of a special statute have been attracted in the present case. Secondly, the offence in question, for which the Appellant has been convicted, does not appear to exhibit his mental depravity. The aim of the SC/ST Act is to protect members of the downtrodden classes from atrocious acts of the upper strata of the society. It appears that although the Appellant may not belong to the same caste as the Complainant, he too belongs to the relatively weaker/backward section of the society and is certainly not in any better economic or social position when compared to the victim. Despite the rampant prevalence of segregation in Indian villages whereby members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe community are forced to restrict their quartes only to certain areas, it is seen that in the present case, the Appellant and the Complainant lived in adjoining houses. Therefore, keeping in mind the socioeconomic status of the Appellant, the overriding objective of the SC/ST Act would not be overwhelmed if the present proceedings are quashed. Thirdly, the incident occurred way back in the year 1994. Nothing on record indicates that either before or after the purported compromise, any untoward incident had transpired between the parties. The State Counsel has also not brought any other occurrence that would lead to believe that the Appellant is either a repeat offender or is unremorseful about what transpired. Fourthly, the Complainant has, on her own free will, without any compulsion, entered into a compromise and wishes to drop the present criminal proceedings against the accused. Fifthly, given the nature of the offence, it is immaterial that the trial against the Appellant had been concluded. Sixthly, the Appellant and the Complainant parties are residents of the same village and live in very close proximity to each other. There is no reason to doubt that the parties themselves have voluntarily settled their differences. Therefore, in order to avoid the revival of healed wounds, and to advance peace and harmony, it will be prudent to effectuate the settlement. [Para 19][511-E-H; 512-A-H] Hitesh Verma v. The State of Uttarakhand & Anr. (2020) 10 SCC 710; Ram Lal & Anr. v. State of J&K (1999) 2 SCC 213: [1999] 1 SCR 230; Surendra Nath Mohanty & Anr. v. State of Orissa (1999) 5 SCC 238 : [1999] 2 SCR 1005; Bankat & Anr. v. State of

Maharastra (2005) 1 SCC 343 : [2004] 6 Suppl.

SCR 406 – referred to.

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SURYA KANT, J. A civil dispute over the ownership and possessory rights of a piece of land between the Appellant and his neighbour Prembai took an ugly turn when the Appellant allegedly not only threw a brick on the Complainant but also made filthy and slur remarks on her caste, which prompted the Complainant to lodge FIR No. 18/94 at Police Station O.E. Panna under Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities Act), 1989 (in short ‘SC/ST Act’) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →