Allahabad High Court
Dinesh Yadav And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home ... on 16 January, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 313 of 2023
Applicant :- Dinesh Yadav And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko And Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Vikram Singh,Naved Ali
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar Maurya
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Ashish Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey,learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing/setting aside the chargesheet no. 122 of 2015, under sections 147,148,336,323,307 I.P.C., Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, Districrt-Lucknow, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 246 of 2015, Police Station-Vibhti Khand, District-Lucknow and cognizance and summoning order dated 30-05-2018 and consequential bailable warrant dated 05-08-2022 pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that an incident took place wherein more than 100 people were suspected to be involved in committing offence, whereas three persons were injured. He next added that from perusal of the injury reports, it is evident that the injuries caused to the injured persons are simple in nature. He submits that due to misunderstanding, the present applicants have been named in the F.I.R., though they are not involved in committing such offence. He next submits that thereafter the parties entered into a compromise and the compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 06-01-2023 and they have settled their dispute. Now there is no grievance or dispute in between the parties and they have put their dispute at rest.
Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the ratio of law laid down in paragraph no. 15.4 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases, 688, the Hon'ble Apex Court has formulated the guidelines so far as the compromise under sections 307 readwith section 34 I.P.C. is concerned. Para no. 15.4 of the Judgment in the case of Laxmi Narayan(Supra) is extracted hereinunder:-
"15.4 Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove."
Referring the aforesaid ratio, he submits that in the instant matter, the nature of injuries are as such wherein this court can invoke jurisdiction while exercising its powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal proceedings. He next added that criminal proceedings initiated in the instant matter would be a futile exercise and therefore, the proceedings initiated in pursaunce of Case Crime No. 246 of 2015, may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos. 2 & 3 on the basis of instructions received, submits that the parties have entered into a compromise on 06-01-2023 and he has annexed the certified copy of the compromise deed dated 06-01-2023 alongwith the Short Counter Affidavit. He added that there is no dispute in between the parties and thus, the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants may be dropped.
Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.
Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.
The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
For a period of one month, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the chargesheet no. 122 of 2015, under sections 147,148,336,323,307 I.P.C., Police Station-Vibhuti Khand, Districrt-Lucknow, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 246 of 2015, Police Station-Vibhti Khand, District-Lucknow shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.
Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.
Order Date :- 16.1.2023
AKS
