Allahabad High Court
Rajendra Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 May, 2023
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106768
Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 61 of 2023
Applicant :- Rajendra Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Tripathi
Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, SriAshutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri U.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to allow this application and quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 2146 of 2003 (State Vs. Bhan Singh & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 73 of 1980, under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Uldan, District Jhansi as well as N.B.W. order dated 11.11.2022, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi, with a further prayer that proceedings of the aforesaid case be stayed against the applicant during the pendency of the present application.
4. On 31.1.2023, the following order was passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court.
"Heard Shri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants and Shri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
The prayer sought is to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.2146 of 2003 (State vs. Bhan Singh & others), arising out of Case Crime No.73 of 1980, u/s 307 I.P.C., P.S.-Uldan, District Jhansi as well as N.B.W. dated 11.11.2022 issued by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi on the ground that the parties have turned into compromise dated 17.9.1981, 25.2.2002 and 17.12.2002.
Contention raised by learned counsel for the applicants is that Asharam is the informant of the case who lodged the FIR against Bhanu Singh, Babu and Rajendra Singh with specific allegation of inflicting firearm injury by Bhanu Singh upon the informant. Accused Bhanu Singh died during the pendency of the case on 26.4.2021. Except that the remaining co-accused persons were on spot of the incident, no overt or covert action has been taken by them in commission of the offence. The main author of the injury was none other than Bhanu Singh who is now no more. On top of it, the parties have come to terms with those persons who have not actively participated in the commission of offence.
Under these circumstances, the contesting parties are required to be presented themselves before the concerned Magistrate along with the compromise deed executed between them. Thereupon, the Magistrate would examine the covenants and signatories of the compromise deed and also after perusing the nature of injuries would give its opinion as to what role was played by the applicants in the commission of offence, what are the nature of those injuries and as to whether this injury sustained by the injured is compoundable or not in the light of judgment given by Hon'ble Apex Court in Narendra Singh vs. State of Punjab, 2014 6 SCC 466.
Let this detailed report/order be furnished by the concerned Magistrate within next 15 days.
Put up this case as fresh on 20.2.2023 along with record of Application u/s 482 No.8107/1982 (Bhanu Singh vs. State) which was dismissed in default on 11.7.2005 and Application u/s 482 No.9677/2002 (Bhanu Singh vs. State).
Till next date of listing, the operation and effect of N.B.W. issued against the applicants shall remain ineffective in order to facilitate the contesting parties to appear before the concerned court."
5. The compromise has been duly verified by the concerned trial court vide its order dated 20.4.2023, the copy of which is on record, as per the office report dated 16.5.2023. The said compromise has been verified by the parties out of their own free will and without any coercion. It is stated in the said report that Babu Ram was assigned the role of having a lathi and Rajendra was emply hand, whereas the main role was assigned to co-accused Bhan Singh, who has not died. Insofar as all the injuries of Asha Ram are concerned, the concerned Court in its report dated 20.4.2023 given its opinion that the same appeared to have been caused by a lathi. Further, insofar as the injury of Asha Ram is concerned, although, he was found to have received a gun-shot injury on the left palm, but the role of same was assigned to co-accused Bhan Singh, who is now died. It is argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter pending in the trial court and is not inclined to give any evidence against the applicants and therefore the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties.
6. Learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 could not dispute the fact that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties which was duly verified by the concerned trial court.
7. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai [email protected] @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.
8. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the order dated 11.11.2022 as well as the entire proceedings of case as prayed for by the applicants.
9. The present application is allowed.
10. The entire proceedings of Case No. 2146 of 2003 (State Vs. Bhan Singh & Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 73 of 1980, under Section 307 I.P.C., P.S. Uldan, District Jhansi as well as N.B.W. order dated 11.11.2022, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi as well as the entire proceedings of the said case are, hereby, quashed, subject to the applicants and the opposite party no. 2 shall deposit Rs.5000/- each before the concerned trial court which shall be utilized by the District Legal Services Authority of the district.
Order Date :- 16.5.2023
CS/-
(Samit Gopal,J.)
