LANDMARK CASE

Gian Singh v. State of Punjab

(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Supreme Court of India · Criminal procedure

At a glance

Citation: (2012) 10 SCC 303
Court: Supreme Court of India
Area of law: Criminal procedure
In one line: Yes, under its inherent power, mainly in private disputes like commercial and family matters, but not in heinous offences.

1 Facts

The question was whether non compoundable offences could be quashed after settlement.

2 Issue

Can a High Court quash proceedings on settlement in non compoundable cases?

3 What the court decided

Yes, under its inherent power, mainly in private disputes like commercial and family matters, but not in heinous offences.

4 Why it matters

It guides quashing on compromise.

5 Think about it

Why are heinous offences excluded?

6 Analyse it yourself

Read the full judgment from an official source or a law database, then brief it in seven steps: facts, issues, arguments, decision, ratio, obiter and significance. Always check the citation before you rely on it.

7 More cases on Criminal procedure

Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. Union of India (2020) 14 SCC 12
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal (1997) 1 SCC 416
Gideon v. Wainwright 372 U.S. 335 (1963)
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565
Joginder Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1994) 4 SCC 260

All 366 landmark cases · Today's Case of the Day · Weekly quiz

← Gherulal Parakh v. Mahadeodas Maiya Gideon v. Wainwright →

A short teaching summary for students. Educational content only, not legal advice.