The powers under Article 142 or under Section 482 Cr.P.C., are exercisable in post­conviction matters only where an appeal  is pending before one or the other Judicial forum. Supreme Court

A civil dispute over the ownership and possessory rights of a which prompted the Complainant to lodge FIR No. 18 94 at Police the Scheduled Tribes 1989 and Prembai who are was built. On 25.06.1994 Ramawatar and his brother Katulal ensued between the parties and the Appellant threw a brick at the was lodged at Police Station Devendra Nagar on the same date itself simple and the offence was found non­cognizable the Police took no further steps. On the following day i.e. 26.06.1994 when the fact that Prembai had lodged an F.I.R. against them. They started abusing her with repeated reference to her caste whilst also threatening her of dire consequences. After that the Complainant and Upon collection of substantial evidence Appellant and co­accused The Trial Court noted that the Complainant belonged to the ‘Prajapati’ community which is a Scheduled Caste. It was also dispute between them. The Trial Court further discerned that the prosecution witnesses had by and large supported the version of the Kuddu used deprecatory language upon the Complainant. It was found that the Appellant had made specific reference to the of the Appellant & co­accused Kuddu were thus held to be in I.P.C. The Trial Court therefore convicted both the accused persons Discontented with their conviction the accused preferred an appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Jabalpur Bench However during the pendency of the proceedings co­accused Kuddu being a member of the Scheduled Caste community. Instead the incident occurred on account of a property dispute between the parties. It was thus submitted that the alleged incident could not 7. When the instant appeal came up for hearing what prompted this Court to issue notice was that the matter had been settled compromise. Reiterating the same plea learned Counsel for the Appellant canvassed before us that the parties are residents of the same village and there is no existing enmity between them. It was may continue to have cordial relations. He drew our attention to a Anr1 wherein it was held that a property dispute between a Article 142 of the Constitution to quash the instant criminal proceedings. The Appellant’s stand and the application for compromise were fully supported by the learned Counsel for the Per Contra learned Counsel for the Respondent State without recourse. It was contended that there was a concurrent finding of conviction and no substantial question of law was involved in the v. State of Orissa3 and Bankat & Anr v. State of Maharastra4 learned State Counsel submitted that the purported settlement compoundable in terms of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 further postulated that of the proceedings including at the appellate level. The Court through brute force threats bribes or other such unethical and illegal means cautioned that in cases where a settlement is struck post­conviction the Courts should inter­alia carefully examine the fashion in which the compromise has been arrived at as well as the “19… Nonetheless we reiterate that such powers of wide of quashing criminal proceedings bearing in mind: Seriousness of the injury if any Conduct of the the purported offence and or other relevant considerations.” Court under Article 142 can be invoked to quash a criminal proceeding on the basis of a voluntary compromise between the 13. We however put a further caveat that the powers under Article matters only where an appeal is pending before one or the other not attain finality till the accused has exhausted his her legal pendency of legal proceedings be that may before the final Court is sine­qua­non to involve the superior court’s plenary powers to do necessitated to prevent the accused from gaining an indefinite 14. With respect to the second question before us it must be noted constructed as a limitation on the Court’s power to do “complete justice”. However this is not to say that this Court can altogether v. Union of India & Anr6 has eloquently clarified this point as “48. The Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction is necessary for doing complete justice “between the parties in any cause or matter pending before it”. The for itself within which to exercise those powers and ordinarily it cannot disregard a statutory provision governing a subject except perhaps to balance the equities between the conflicting claims of the litigating before it. Indeed this Court is not a court of restricted It is a “problem­solver in the nebulous areas” 3 SCC 655 : 1991 SCC 734] but the substantive statutory provisions under Article 142. Indeed these constitutional powers cannot in any way be controlled by any statutory provisions but at the same time these powers are not meant to be exercised when their exercise may come 15. 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 measures the Scheduled Castes Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper­castes. The Articles 15 17 and 21 of the Constitution with a twin­fold objective of 16. On the other hand where it appears to the Court that the offence in question although covered under the SC ST Act is primarily committed on account of the caste of the victim or where the compromise settlement if the Court is satisfied that the underlying 17. Adverting to the case in hand we note that the present Appellant “3. Punishments for offences of atrocities­ intentionally insults or intimidates with intent to 18. We may hasten to add that in cases such as the present the the weaker sections of our country they are more prone to acts of coercion and therefore ought to be accorded a higher level of relief can be given to the accused party. What factors the Courts the powers under Article 142 and quash the instant Criminal Firstly the very purpose behind Section 3(1)(x) of the SC ST is to the Scheduled Caste Scheduled Tribe community. In the present the genesis of the deprecated incident was the afore­stated that it would not be incorrect to categorise the occurrence as one of criminality even though the provisions of a special statute have Secondly the offence in question for which the Appellant has been although the Appellant may not belong to the same caste as the Complainant he too belongs to the relatively weaker backward social position when compared to the victim. Despite the rampant 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 that would lead us to believe that the Appellant is either a repeat Fourthly the Complainant has on her own free will without any compulsion entered into a compromise and wishes to drop the Fifthly given the nature of the offence it is immaterial that the trial Sixthly the Appellant and the Complainant parties are residents of the same village and live in very close proximity to each other. We settled their differences. Therefore in order to avoid the revival of healed wounds and to advance peace and harmony it will be prudent 20. Consequently and for the aforementioned reasons we find it and quash the criminal proceedings to do complete justice between Trial Court and the High Court are set aside. Bail bonds if any are

Summary: 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 as held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court through the learned bench led by Justice Surya Kant in the case of Ramawatar v. State of Madhya Pradesh (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1393 OF 2011) The brief facts of the case are that 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 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 .   The Appellant and his co­accused were subsequently tried, which led to the Appellant’s conviction under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act and consequential sentence of six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1000/­. The Appellant challenged his conviction and sentence before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur Bench but his appeal  was dismissed vide the impugned judgment dated 02.08.2010. The Supreme Court held, “Having considered the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case in light of the afore­stated principles, as well as having meditated on the application for compromise, we are inclined to invoke the   powers   under   Article   142   and   quash   the   instant   Criminal proceedings with the sole objective of doing complete justice between the parties before us. Keeping in mind the socio­economic status of the Appellant, we are of the opinion that the overriding objective of the SC/ST Act would not be overwhelmed if the present proceedings are quashed. 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. Consequently, and for the aforementioned reasons, we find it appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and quash the criminal proceedings to do complete justice between the parties.”