Allahabad High Court
Manoj vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 13 December, 2022
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 67
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34407 of 2022
Applicant :- Manoj
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Pt. S.P. Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sonu Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Sri S.P. Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
By means of the present 482 Cr.P.C. application, the applicant is invoking the powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge sheet dated 16.06.2022 as well as entire proceeding of case no. 503 of 2022 arising out of case crime no. 82 of 2022 under Section 363, 366, 376 (3) IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S. Sakrar, District Jhansi as well as cognizance order dated 26.07.2022 passed by Special Judge, POCSO Act, Jhansi.
Contention raised by the counsel that the FIR was registered under Section 363 IPC against the sole named accused persons. From the contents of FIR as well as 161 Cr.P.C. statement of Kailash Kushwaha, first informant, it is evident that informant with his family has gone to attend the marriage of Ramesh Kushwaha, where they met with sole named accused Manoj son of Prakash Kushwaha. It is urged by learned counsel for the applicant that Kailash Kushwaha and the father of the Manoj Kushwara (prime accused), are brother-in-law(Sadhoo) and the applicant has enticed away his minor girl and since then her whereabouts is not known. The girl was eventually recovered and her 161 and 164 Cr.P.C. statement were recorded. The victim was produced before the doctor and candidly alleged that they reached up to Surat, Gujrat and have established physical relationship. It is alleged by the learned counsel for the applicant that now the parties has come to terms. The age of the girl as per certificate issued by CMO, Jhansi is 15 years a provenly minor girl. No amount of compromise would absolve the applicant from the liability for the commission of offence. The said compromise deed have filed by way of supplementary affidavit as Annexure SA-1 to the affidavit. In addition to this this supplementary affidavit sworn by Summer Singh Kushwaha son of Prakash Kushwan on one hand and Kailash Kushwaha on the other hand. This is most heinous offence, whereby a young minor girl is being involved in the sexual activities of the boy. More over in the light of the settled legal pronouncement of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of DPARBATBHAI AAHIR @ PARBATBHAI BHIMSINHBHAI KARMUR AND OTHERS. VS. STATE OF GUJARAT AND ANOTHER, decided on 4th October, 2017, Hon'ble Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud J. delivering the judgment on behalf of the Full Bench has summarized the broad principles with regard to exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the case of compromise/settlement between the parties. Which emerges from precedent of the subjects as follows: -
i. "Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognizes and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.
ii.The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable.
iii. In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or complaint should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power;
iv. While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court;
v. The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated;
vi. In the exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot appropriately be quashed.
Thus matter relates to moral turpitude or mental depravity is beyond the scope of any compounding. So far as, that the contesting parties are related to each other, it is all the more reason to punish the applicant who is not caring that the victim comes under the prohibited degree of relationship. As such taking the guidelines from above, I do not find any good reason to affirm the covenants of compromise or quash the proceeding in the light of so-called compromise between the parties.
The application is devoid of merit and accordingly REJECTED.
Order Date :- 13.12.2022
Abhishek Sri.
