Yasar vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 25722 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:184566
 
Court No. - 90
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5976 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Yasar
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Sharma,Prashant Sharma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

1. None is present on behalf of opposite party no.2.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

3. The present applicant has invoked the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. beseeching the quashing of cognizance order dated 26.11.2022 and charge sheet No.329 of 2022 dated 08.07.2022 as well as entire proceeding of S.T. No.981/2022 (State vs. Yasar), arising out of the Case Crime No.313 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) SC/St Act, Police Station Gajraula, District Amroha, pending before the court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Amroha on the basis of compromise.

4. Opposite party no. 2 has lodged an F.I.R. being Case Crime No.313 of 2022 with respect to the alleged incident dated 11.06.2022 wherein he has been thrashed by the applicants and sustained injuries. During pendency of the case, both the parties have arrived at compromise and amicably settled their dispute. On the request made on behalf of learned counsel for the parties, this Court, vide order dated 23.02.2023, has permitted the parties to file a fresh compromise application before the court below and after getting it verified certified copy of the said verification order was ordered to be obtained and file before this Court. For ready reference, the order dated 23.02.2023 is quoted hereinbelow:-

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

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet No. 329 of 2022 dated 08.07.2022, cognizance order dated 26.11.2022 as well as entire proceedings of S.T. No. 981 of 2022 (State Vs. Yasar), arising out of Case Crime No. 313 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Da), 3(1)(Dha) SC/ST Act, Police Station Gajraula, District Amroha, on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute through compromise. The original copy of the compromise taken place between the parties has been annexed with this petition as Annexure No.4.

Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can very well be ascertained by the Court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the court below.

Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise deed along with an application before the court below within a week from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. On submission of the same, the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, after ensuring the presence of both the parties 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. It is also clarified that the compensation as awarded to opposite party no.2 under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act shall be returned to the authority concerned before verification of the aforesaid compromise.

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.

List this case on 26.04.2023 along with report of the court below before appropriate Court. "

5. In pursuance of the order dated 23.02.2023 passed by this Court, both the parties have filed the compromise application supported by an affidavit. Learned Additional Session Judge/ Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Amroha has verified the aforesaid compromise and submitted his verification report dated 28.03.2023 along with the copy of compromise application and the compromise order dated 28.03.2023.

6. Perusal of the compromise verification order dated 28.03.2023 reveals that both the parties (first informant and all the accused) have appeared before the court concerned personally and have been identified by their respective counsels. It has been observed that terms and conditions of the compromise has been spelled to the parties, who have admitted the factum of compromise and, accordingly, the compromise has been verified by the court concerned.

7. Perusal of the compromise application reveals that it bears the signature of both the parties and the photographs of both the signatories are affixed on the reverse side of first page of the compromise.

8. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that, in the above eventuality of the compromise took place between the parties and the compromise verification order dated 28.03.2023, the instant application may be allowed and the criminal proceeding initiated against the present applicant may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have buried the hatchet and there is no grudges between them against each other. To quash the entire 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.

9. In a recent 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."

10. Learned AGA has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the court concerned.

11. Having considered the compromise verification order dated 28.03.2023, compromise application and 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.

12. 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 the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 21.9.2023

Jitendra