Ankit Garg And 3 Others vs State Of U.P.And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 25097 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180647
 
Court No. - 90
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29263 of 2021
 

 
Applicant :- Ankit Garg And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Vishvendra Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned AGA and perused the record on board.

2. No one is present for the opposite party No.2.

3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the summoning order dated 11.10.2021 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Crl. Complaint Case No.98368 of 2019 (Smt. Ankita Agarwal Vs. Ankit Garg and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana Rakabganj, District Agra, pending in the court of learned Civil Jude (Junior Division)/Fast Track Court, Court No.1, Agra.

4. Learned Magistrate has issued process under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act against the present applicants, vide order dated 11.10.2021. During pendency of the proceedings, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and entered into the compromise. On the request made on behalf of learned counsel for the applicants this Court, vide order dated 27.04.2022, referred the matter before the trial court for verification of the compromise. For ready reference order dated 27.04.2022 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 summoning order dated 11.10.2021 passed by learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/ FTC, Court no. 1, Agra and entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Complaint case No. 98368 of 2019 Smt. Ankita Agarwal Vs. Ankit Garg and others, under section sections 498-A, 323, 504 iPC and section 4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana Rakabganj, District Agra.

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 A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the correctness of the compromise.

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."

4. In pursuance of the order dated 27.04.2022, learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.1, Agra, has submitted the report dated 24.8.2022 along with compromise verification order dated 18.8.2022 and the compromise application dated 17.8.2022. Perusal of report reveals that compromise application dated 17.8.2022 was moved on behalf of the parties affixing their photographs. In presence of both the parties, who have been identified by their respective counsels, compromise verification order dated 18.08.2022 was passed. It has been observed in the compromise verification order that the terms and conditions of the compromise have been spelled out to the parties, who have admitted the factum of compromise and stated that they entered the compromise on their own volition without any duress. Accordingly, compromise has been verified. Supplementary affidavit 10.08.2023 reveals that proceedings under Section 13B of Hindu Marriage Act has been finalized by order dated 05.09.2022, accordingly, the husband and wife are judicially separated. Apart from that proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. has been decided as well by the Additional Principal Judge, Family Court, Agra, vide order dated 18.06.2022, on the basis of compromise wherein applicants (private respondent herein) have not pressed the said application. Proceeding under Section 12 of Domestic Violence Act has also been dismissed on the basis of compromise took place between the parties.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that, in the eventuality of settlement of dispute between the parties and the verification report submitted by the learned learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C. Court No.1, Agra 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 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 applicants 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.

9. 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.

10. 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 summoning order dated 11.10.2021 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Crl. Complaint Case No.98368 of 2019 (Smt. Ankita Agarwal Vs. Ankit Garg and others) under Sections 498A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana Rakabganj, District Agra, pending in the court of learned Civil Jude (Junior Division)/Fast Track Court, Court No.1, Agra is hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 18.9.2023

Md Faisal