Dilip Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 24914 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179039
 
Court No. - 90
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23250 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Dilip Kumar And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dinesh Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

1. Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the criminal proceeding in Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2018 pending in the Court of Session Judge, Kaushambi arising out of order dated 04.10.2018 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi in Case No.3760 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of Case Crime No.253 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi.

4. Instant matter is arising out of matrimonial discord. Having being dissatisfied with the behavior of her in-laws, respondent No.2 has lodged the FIR, being Case Crime No.253 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi making allegations of torture and cruelty for demand of dowry. Trial Court has convicted the present applicants vide order dated 04.10.2018 passed in Case No.3760 of 2018. Having being aggrieved, accused have preferred an appeal being Criminal Appeal No.20 of 2018. During pendency of the appeal both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and entered into compromise. Based on said compromise, applicants have urged to quash the entire criminal proceedings. A Coordinate Bench of this Court, vide order dated 01.12.2021, has referred the matter before trial Court for verification of compromise, which is quoted herein below :-

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of entire criminal proceeding of compromise dated 15.09.2021 in Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2018 (Dilip Kumar and others Vs. State) pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Kaushambi in Case no. 3760 of 2018, under sections 498-A, 494, 323 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act in case crime No. 253 of 2013, P.S. Karari, District Kaushambi.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the charge sheet has been issued, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing.

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the dispute.

Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of two months from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.

List after two months.

Till then no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants."

5. In pursuance of the order dated 01.12.2021, compromise verification report has been submitted by Additional District & Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Kaushambi. Having being dissatisfied with the compromise took place between the parties and the verification report submitting by court concerned, this Court, vide order dated 12.04.2023, issued a direction to file a fresh compromise application with the signatures of all the parties concerned inasmuch as in earlier compromise only husband and wife have put their signatures. For ready reference order dated 12.04.2023 is quoted herein below :-

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Appeal No. 20 of 2018 (Dilip Kumar and others Vs. State), pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Kaushambi, arising out of order dated 04.10.2018 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kaushambi in CAse No. 3760 of 2018 (State Vs. Dilip Kumar and others), under Sections 498-A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, POlice Station Karari, District Kaushambi.

It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that applicant nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 are the husband, mother-in-law, father-in-law and Jeth of opposite party no.2 and the dispute between the parties are matrimonial in nature. He further submits that on account of intervention of well-wishers of the applicants and opposite party no.2, they have settled their disputes and arrived at a compromise. On the basis of said compromise, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 before the court below that she does not want to press the criminal proceedings initiated by her against the applicants. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

Put up this case on 01.05.2023 before the appropriate Bench.

Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise application before the court below within a week from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. They further undertake to ensure their presence before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 24.04.2023 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.

Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours.

Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within a week from today.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid criminal case."

6. In pursuance of the order dated 12.04.2023, all the parties have submitted fresh compromise application dated 25.04.2023, which was duly verified by the court concerned on the same day i.e. on 25.04.2023. Certified copy of the compromise application dated 25.04.2023 and verification order passed by the court concerned endorsed on the reverse side of the first page of the compromise application are filed as Annexure-S.A.-2 to the supplementary affidavit filed today.

7. Perusal of the compromise application and its verification order dated 25.04.2023 reveals that all the accused persons, namely, Dilip Kumar, Usha Devi, Bhaiya Lal and Munna Lal were present before court concerned and they have been identified by their respective counsels. Informant-Smt. Depa Devi was also identified by her counsel, namely Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate. Contents of the compromise application (paper 59 ka) has been spelled out to both, who have admitted the factum of compromise.

8. Learned counsel for the applicants, in the eventuality of the amicable settlement between the parties and verification of compromise in pursuance of the compromise verification order dated 25.04.2023 passed by the learned Appellate Court, has submitted that application may be allowed and criminal proceedings pending before appellate court as well as FIR and charge-sheet may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have entered into compromise on their own volition without any duress and they have buried the hatchet and now there is no grudges against each other.

9. To quash the cognizance 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.

10. 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."

11. Hon'ble Apex Court, in the recent judgment dated August 10, 2022 passed in the case of Kapil Gupta Vs. Station of NCT of Delhi and Anr. Criminal Appeal No.1217 of 2022, has quashed the criminal proceeding arising out of offence under Section 376 I.P.C.

12. Learned A.G.A. has no objection to decide the instant application on the basis of compromise took place between the parties as mentioned above.

13. 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.

14. 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 of Case No.3760 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act arising out of Case Crime No.253 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 494, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Karari, District Kaushambi is hereby quashed.

15. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.

Order Date :- 15.9.2023

Amit/-