Abbul Hasan @ Abdul Hasan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 3511 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Abbul Hasan @ Abdul Hasan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 15 January, 2025

Author: Dinesh Pathak

Bench: Dinesh Pathak

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6782
 
Court No. - 74
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35512 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Abbul Hasan @ Abdul Hasan And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Shivam Verma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J. 
 

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A and perused the record on board.

2. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the order proposed to be passed hereunder, this Court is proceeding to decide instant matter finally without putting notice to Opposite Party No. 2 with liberty that he may file recall application in case the facts and details given in the instant application are found to be incorrect.

3. The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 31 of 2022 (State vs. Mustafa and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 607 of 2020bunder Sections 420, 406, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C, Police Station-Tilhar, District- Shahjahanpur, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) Tilhar, Shahjahanpur.

4. During pendency of the criminal proceedings, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and inked compromise. Having considered the amicable settlement took place between the parties, this Court, vide order dated 25.9.2023 has relegated the parties before the court below to get their compromise verified. For ready reference, the order dated 25.9.2023 is quoted hereinbelow:

"Heard Sri Shivam Verma, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Udai Bhan, learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application has been filed for quashing of the charge sheet No. 13 of 2016 dated 17.1.2016 and stay the entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 31 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 607 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Tilhar, district-Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Tilhar, Shahjahanpur, as well as chargesheet dated 5.12.2020.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have entered into compromise dated 23.8.2023 which has also been filed before the C.J.M., Shahjahanpur, copy whereof has been annexed at page no. 41 of the paper book but the same has not been verified by the trial court. He, therefore, prays that the proceeding of this case may be quashed on the basis of aforesaid compromise.

Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 also admitted this fact that both the parties have entered into compromise.

Considering the above submission, C.J.M., Shahjahanpur is directed to verify the compromise after summoning the parties and after verification of the same he will send his report along with the copy of verified compromise to this Court.

List in the week commencing 20.11.2023.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in Case No. 31 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 607 of 2020, under Sections 420, 406, 452, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. Tilhar, district-Shahjahanpur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Tilhar, Shahjahanpur."

5. In pursuance of the order dated 25.9.2023 passed by this Court, learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Tilhar, Shahjahanpur has submitted compromise verification report with an averment that both the parties have appeared before the court below, who have been identified by their respective counsel. Accordingly, compromise has been verified. Along with compromise verification report dated 3.5.2024, a copy of the compromise application and copy of the compromise verification order dated 1.12.2023 have been annexed. For ready reference, order dated 1.12.2023 is quoted herein below:-

"01.12.23

???? ??????? ?????? ???? ?????? ??? ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ???? ? ?????? ??? ???????? ?????? ???????? ??????? ??? ??? ??????? ?????? ???????? ?????? ???? ?? ???? ?? ??? ???? ? ?????????? ???????? 23.08.23 ??? ??? ?? ????? ????? ??????? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???????? ???? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ???????? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???????? ???? ???? ????? ????? ?????? ?? ??? ??????? ?? ??????? ???? ???? ????? ?? ???????? ???? ???????? ????? ???

??? ???????? ??????? ?? ???? ?????????? ?? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ???????? ???? ???

Judicial Magistrate

Tilhar, Shahjahanpur"

6. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the above eventuality of amicable settlement took place between the parties, instant application may be allowed and the entire proceedings may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have entered into compromise out of their own volition without any duress and burried the hatchet. There is no grudges between them against each other. 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.

7. 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 misdemeanor. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

8. Learned A.G.A. 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.

9. Having considered the compromise took place between the parties 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.

10. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the settlement/agreement inked between the parties, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 15.1.2025

vinay