Allahabad High Court
Anoop Kumar Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 January, 2023
Bench: Rahul Chaturvedi
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 67
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1141 of 2023
Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Mazeed,Syed Mohammad Farook
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rahul Chaturvedi,J.
Heard Shri Abdul Mazeed, learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved seeking the quashing of summoning order dated 18.4.2011 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.1544 of 2010 (Mohd. Azam Khan vs. Anoop Kumar Singh), u/s 392 I.P.C., Police Station-Naini, District-Allahabad, pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.2, Allahabad in the light of compromise executed between the parties.
Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that on earlier occasion an application u/s 482 No.20540 of 2022 (Anoop Kumar Singh vs. State of U.P.) was moved, whereby Co-Ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.7.2022 after disposing of that petition, have directed the court concerned to verify the compromise within a period of two months and also not to take any coercive action against the applicant during that period.
Pursuant to aforesaid order of the Court, the parties have appeared before the court below and filed the compromise, whereby the concerned court vide order dated 10.08.2022 has verified the compromise executed between the parties and its signatories.
Submission raised by learned counsel for the applicant is that way back in the year 2010 the opposite party no.2, Mohd. Azam Khan has initiated the complaint case against the applicant u/s 392 I.P.C. The basic crux of the allegations is that the applicant was a Traffic Inspector and he has taken two golden rings, Rs.6000/- cash, driving license, I.D. and ATM card of the complainant from the site of accident. Now the matter has been compromised between the parties and no dispute is left between them and opposite party no.2 does not want to pursue the matter any more against the applicant.
In compliance of order passed by this Court, the court below has also verified the compromise vide order dated 10.8.2022, therefore, it has been prayed that the proceeding against the applicant ought to be dropped.
Though Section-392 I.P.C. is a non compoundable offence but fact remains that taking into account the gravity of offence and quantum of punishment and that too when the complainant does not want to pursue the proceeding pending against the applicant. Learned counsel for the applicant has also relied upon the judgment of The State of Madhya Pradesh VS. Laxmi Narayan and others in Criminal Appeal No.349 of 2019 decided on 05.03.2019 in which Hon'ble Apex Court has observed in paragraph no.13 that :
"(i)such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;"
From the aforesaid case law it is clear that even in the cases which involved non compoundable offences, their quashing has been approved by the Apex Court, if the nature of the offence is such which does not have grave and wider social ramifications and where the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties. So far as the present case is concerned, it does not involve heinous and serious offences as categorized by Hon'ble Supreme Court in aforesaid case law and that the nature and gravity and the severity of the offence which are more particularly in private dispute and differences between the parties and also does not have serious impact on society.
Having profound regard to the aforesaid case law and keeping in view that the nature of the offence is such which does not have grave and wider social ramifications and where the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties and also the complainant/opposite party no.2 does not want to pursue the matter against the applicant, I am of the opinion that in order to meet the ends of justice and avert the abuse of court's process the impugned proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed forthwith.
Accordingly the present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed and the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.1544 of 2010 (Mohd. Azam Khan vs. Anoop Kumar Singh), against the applicant is hereby quashed.
Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower court within 20 days.
Order Date :- 23.1.2023/M. Kumar
