'HC can't revive quashed FIR for breach of compromise': Supreme Court cites Section 362 CrPC on limited scope of such power

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said the High Court cannot revive an FIR which has quashed on the basis of a compromise among the parties, due to subsequent breach of the conditions.

A bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and Sanjay Karol pointed out Section 362 CrPC provided that a court shall not, once it has signed the judgment or final order disposing of a case, alter or review the same, except to correct an error clerical or arithmetic.

"Section 362 CrPC provides for a fairly limited scope of the exercise of such power," the court said.

Holding that violations of a term of a compromise have their own avenues of law, the court set aside the orders of October 8, 2018 and of April 29, 2019 by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, which revived an FIR of July 15, 2014 lodged in Gurgaon for offences of cheating and breach of trust, quashed earlier, in view of breach of the compromise in a property dispute case.

Allowing an appeal filed by Raghunath Sharma and others, Justice Karol wrote for the bench in the 14-page judgment on May 16, 2025, "We may record our surprise that the High Court adopted the course it did without reference to the well-established position of law."

The court emphasised the role of the court, after a judgment has been delivered, is circumscribed by the law itself.

"In the present facts, the only provision of law, that permits an alteration in the judgment, in its own terms, was not resorted to. What was done was a review of the judgment quashing the proceedings. That, in the considered view of this court, was not permissible," the bench said.

The bench underscored that the bar under Section 362 CrPC is almost absolute.

The court pointed out the only exceptions to the bar, which would then permit the invocation of inherent powers, would be if it is necessary to meet the ends of justice; or to remedy the abuse of the process of law.

"Other than these two circumstances, such inherent powers do not permit the doing of what stands prohibited by the text of the statute," the bench said.

The court ordered the Supreme Court Registry to circulate a copy of the judgment to all High Courts, for necessary dissemination to all concerned.

"It is our hope that lending clarity, coupled with the necessary information being supplied would curb such unjustified use of power," the bench said.