Allahabad High Court
Gulab Singh And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 November, 2024
Author: Dinesh Pathak
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:183765
Court No. - 76
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5775 of 2024
Applicant :- Gulab Singh And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Braham Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party No.2 as well as learned AGA and perused the record on board.
2. The applicant has invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire criminal proceeding of Crl. Case No.5978 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 55 of 1992, under Sections 147, 436, 427 I.P.C. and 3(iv) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-Ist, Moradabad.
3. Having considered the amicable settlement between the parties during criminal proceeding this Court, vide order dated 04.03.2024 has relegated the parties before the court below to get their compromise verified. For ready reference order dated 04.03.2024 is quoted herein below :-
"Learned counsel for the applicants is present.
It is submitted by him that in compliance of this Court's order dated 09.11.2023 appended at page-25 of the paper book, the compromise between the parties has been verified by the trial court. The certified copy of the compromise deed is appended at page-28 of the paper book and the verification order is appended at page-29 of the paper book. It is further submitted that FIR was lodged against seven persons, while the charge-sheet has been filed against six persons only. Out of these six persons, three persons have died and rest three persons Rajendra Singh, Gulab Singh and Krishna Kumar Bhatnagar have moved this application with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.5978 of 2009 (arising out of Case Crime No.55 of 1992), under Sections 147, 436, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3(iv) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
From the perusal of the record, it is found that in compliance of order dated 09.11.2023, though, the compromise between the parties is found to have verified by the trial court, but as per FIR, the houses of Dhara Singh, Thakur Das and Ramcharan are said to have set a blaze, but Thakur Das and Ramcharan have not been made party to the compromise deed. Hence, the compromise deed without impleading all the victims as a party cannot be accepted, same is thus rejected. Apart from this, there is nothing on record that the victims have returned the compensation received from the State Government.
It is submitted that in previous Application U/S 482 No. 33730 of 2023, the receipt of deposition of the amount of compesation was filed, so the prayer is made to summon that file.
Let the decided Application U/S 482 No.33730 of 2023 be placed before the Court on the next date fixed.
Meanwhile, a report be summoned from the District Magistrate concerned through the Registrar General, High Court Allahabad as to how much amount was received by the opposite party no.2/ victims as compensation from the State Government with regard to the present case.
All the victims have not been made party to the compromise deed and in the absence of rest two victims Thakur Das and Ramcharan the compromise appended at page-28 of the paper book has been rejected. Hence, the parties alongwith the said victims are again directed to appear before the trial court within 15 days from today alongwith their compromise deed. If the parties alongwith the said victims appear before the trial court within the time stipulated alongwith their compromise deed, the trial court shall verify the said compromise deed, pass an order thereon and transmit the certified copy of the compromise deed alongwith the certified copy of the order passed thereon, to this Court within 15 days thereafter.
All the victims/ opposite party no.2 are directed to deposit the amount of compensation, if left any, with the State Exchequer and place its original receipt before the Court on the date fixed.
List on 03.04.2024 in the additional cause list.
Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Criminal Case No.5978 of 2009 (arising out of Case Crime No.55 of 1992), under Sections 147, 436, 427 I.P.C. and Section 3(iv) of SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Ist, Moradabad."
4. In pursuance of the order dated 04.03.2024, learned Special Judge (S.C./S.T Act), Moradabad has submitted compromise verification report dated 12.07.2024 with an averment that out of six accused three have died against whom case has been ordered to be abated. Apart from that two injured namely Thkur Das and Ram Dayal were died as well. It has also been observed that victim Dhara Singh s/o of Motiram has received compensation amount under S.C./S.T. Act to the tune of Rs.6,250/-. However, he has returned the said amount on 27.03.2024 through Challan No. CR06216. Learned court concerned has verified the compromise (Paper No. 8-B) in compliance of the order passed by this Court. Applicant has filed supplementary affidavit along with certified copy of compromise application dated 12.7.2024
5. District Social Welfare Officer, Moradabad has submitted his report dated 28.03.2024 verify the fact that Dhara Singh S/o Motiram who has received the compensation amount has deposited the amount by Challan No. CR06216.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that, in the eventuality of settlement of dispute between the parties and the verification report submitted by the learned Sessions Judge 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.
7. 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.
8. 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."
9. 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. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has nodded the factum of compromise entered into between the parties and he has no objection, if the instant application is decided finally on the basis of the said compromise. He also submits that compromise was verified in presence of both the parties, who have voluntarily entered into compromise and opposite party no. 2 does not wants to prosecute the present case against the applicant any more as no dispute remains between the parties.
11. 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 Crl. Case No.5978 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 55 of 1992, under Sections 147, 436, 427 I.P.C. and 3(iv) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Katghar, District Moradabad is hereby quashed.
13. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.
Order Date :- 23.11.2024
Md Faisal
