Allahabad High Court
Ajay Kumar And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 10 October, 2023
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195415
Court No. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15737 of 2023
Applicant :- Ajay Kumar And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Suraj Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicants is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA. No one has appeared for opposite party No.2.
3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 545 of 2021 (State Vs. Ajai Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.57 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Fast Track Court, Kaushambi and also to quash the charge sheet dated 05.08.2021 as well as summoning order dated 01.10.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi on the basis of compromise.
4. In pursuance of the order passed by competent court in application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., an FIR has been lodged levelling allegation of cheating against the present applicants. Considering the amicable settlement between the parties this Court, vide order dated 16.5.2023, has directed to the court below for verification of the compromise. For ready reference order dated 16.05.2023 is quoted herein below :-
"1. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 545 of 2021 (State vs. Ajay Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 57 of 2021, under Section 419, 420 I.P.C., P.S. Karari, District Kaushambi as well as charge-sheet no. 1/2021 dated 5.8.2021 as well as summoning order dated 1.10.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Jr. Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi.
2. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned AGA for the State.
3. Counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants and the opposite party no.2 have entered into compromise. A copy of compromise dated 14.12.2022 is annexed as Annexure -4 to the affidavit.
4. Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the Court concerned along with a copy of this order within two weeks from today and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a short date for verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of three weeks thereafter. Upon due verification, the Court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court on or before 3.8.2023.
5. Place this case in the additional cause list on 3.8.2023 before appropriate Court.
6. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."
4. In pursuance of the order dated 16.05.2023 passed by this Court, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fast Track Court-II/ Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi has submitted the verification report dated 02.08.2023 along with the copy of compromise and compromise verification order dated 31.5.2023 passed on the said compromise. Perusal of record reveals that both the parties have personally appeared before the court below and they have been identified by their respective counsels. Contents of the compromise has been spelled out to both the parties who have admitted the factum of compromise and stated that they entered into the compromise on their own volition without any duress. Certified copy of the compromise verification order dated 31.5.2023 has been filed as well along with the supplementary affidavit.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that, in the eventuality of settlement of dispute between the parties and the verification report submitted by learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Fast Track Court-II/ Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi verifying the compromise took place between the parties, instant application may be allowed and and criminal proceedings may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have voluntarily entered into the compromise and now parties have buried the hatchet and there is no grudges against each other.
6. To quash the cognizance/summoning order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court :-
(i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675.
(ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667.
(iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1.
(iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.
(v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.
7. In a judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./ charge-sheet/ criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./ charge-sheet/ criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below:-
"15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power 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 recognises 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 compliant 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 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 approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences;
(vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned;
(viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute;
(ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and
(x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."
8. Learned AGA has contended that he has no objection in deciding the matter on the basis of compromise which has been duly verified by the court concerned.
10. Having considered the verification report dated 02.08.2023 and compromise verification order dated 31.5.2023, with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.
11. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been duly verified by the concerned court below, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding Case No. 545 of 2021 (State Vs. Ajai Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No.57 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420 I.P.C., Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division)/ Fast Track Court, Kaushambi and the charge sheet dated 05.08.2021 as well as summoning order dated 01.10.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi is hereby quashed.
12. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.
Order Date :- 10.10.2023
Md Faisal
