Allahabad High Court
Abhishek Shankar Mathur ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 10 October, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:65811
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9804 of 2023
Applicant :- Abhishek Shankar Mathur According To Prosecution Actual Name Abhishek Shankar And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. U.P. Lucknow And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Siddhartha Sinha,Arun Sinha,Mohammad Zeeshan Lari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed today by the counsel for the applicant is taken on record.
Sri Ambika Prasad Mishra, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakaltanama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ambika Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, Sri Sushil 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 of the proceedings of the impugned Charge-sheet No. 1/2023 dated 27.03.2023 filed in Case Crime No./FIR No.208/2022, U/s- 307, 323, 506, 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at PS- Hussainganj, District- Lucknow as well as the Cognizance order dated 14.07.2023, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Lucknow taking cognizance against the petitioners on the 'impugned Charge-sheet No. 1/2023 dated 27.03.2023 filed in Case Crime No./FIR No.208/2022, U/s- 307, 323, 506, 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at PS- Hussainganj, District- Lucknow.
The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the matter is arising out of matrimonial dispute and giving serious nature to the same, false and concocted story has been narrated in the First Information Report. He next added that from the injury report it is evident that there is no injury on the vital part of the body of the injured and those are simple in nature as per the opinion of Doctors. He next added that it is a dispute between husband and wife and they have decided to live together and allowing further criminal proceedings would ruin the marital life of the parties. He next added that the parties have settle the dispute, vide compromise deed dated 30.09.2023 and now they are living peacefully as husband and wife in the matrimonial house.
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. 208 of 2022, may be quashed.
On the other hand, the learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has also supported the version of the counsel for the applicant and submits that due to sudden altercation the incident has taken place, but that is in between husband and wife and now they have settled the dispute amicably and they have decided to live together. Therefore, the criminal proceeding against the applicant may be dropped.
On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State has opposed the matter on merits, but he has no objection if the parties have settled the dispute amicably.
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 theCase Crime No./FIR No.208/2022, U/s- 307, 323, 506, 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act at PS- Hussainganj, 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 :- 10.10.2023
Anurag
