Bombay High Court
Shrikrushna Pandurang Tayde And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 21 June, 2017
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale
1 jg.apl.290.17.odt
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 290 OF 2017
(1) Shrikrushna Pandurang Tayde,
aged about 57 years,
R/o Navsari, Amravati.
(2) Prashant Nandkishore Rathi
aged about 38 years,
R/o Ambapeth, Amravati. ... Applicants
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra,
Through Police Station Officer,
Gadge Nagar Police Station,
Amravati. ... Non-applicant
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S. Z. Qazi, Advocate for the applicants
Shri A. M. Deshpande, APP for the State/non-applicant
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE and
M. G. GIRATKAR, JJ.
DATE : 21/06/2017.
Judgment (Per : M.G. Giratkar, J)
Heard Shri Qazi, learned counsel for the applicant and
Shri Deshpande, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State/
non-applicant.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2 jg.apl.290.17.odt
3. Present application is arising out of filing of charge-sheet
against the applicant no. 2 for the offences punishable under Section
324 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled
Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The applicant no. 2 is working as a Manager of the School, namely,
Maharishi Public School at Amravti. Son of the applicant no. 1 was
studying in the school of the applicant no. 2. The applicant no. 1 got
the Transfer Certificate of his son. From perusal of Transfer Certificate
by the applicant no. 1, it was found that caste of his son was written as
Hindu/Buddha, therefore, the applicant no. 1 asked the applicant no. 2
to correct the caste on Transfer Certificate as 'Chambhar'. It was alleged
in the report that the applicant no. 2 got annoyed and hurled abuses on
the caste of the applicant no. 1. The applicant no. 1 lodged the report.
After investigation, charge-sheet came to be filed at Special Court,
Amravati for the offences punishable under Sections 324 of the Indian
Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and the
Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the applicant
no. 2.
4. After lodging report, the applicant nos. 1 and 2 have settled
the matter looking to the circumstances and looking to need of harmony
3 jg.apl.290.17.odt
in the society. The applicants have given up their claims and allegations
against each other and amicably settled the matter with mediation of
the respected persons from the society. The applicant no. 1 submitted
that the offending act alleged was against the person that is against the
applicant no. 2, therefore, the applicant no. 1 in order to maintain
cordial relation and harmony in the society with the applicant no. 2, had
left all the claims and allegations against the applicant no. 2. Therefore,
prayed to quash the charge-sheet no. 197/2014 filed by the Gadge
Nagar Police Station for the offences punishable under Section 324 of
the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and
the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act against the applicant
no. 2.
5. Both the applicants are present before this Court and
submitted before us that they have compromised the matter and the
applicant no. 1 does not want to prosecute the applicant no. 2.
6. After hearing both the applicants, it is clear that they have
settled the matter. The applicant no. 1 who is the complainant/
aggrieved person himself does not want to prosecute the applicant
no. 2. Shri Qazi, learned counsel for the applicants pointed out us
4 jg.apl.290.17.odt
judgment in the case of Ashraf Mohammad Calcattawala and ors. Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and anr. reported in 2015 ALL MR(Cri)
1778.
7. The offences charged against the applicant no. 2 are not
compoundable. The trial Court cannot compound the offence. In the
above cited decision, it is held by the Division of this Court that :
8. The law laid down by the Apex Court in the matter of
Gian Singh, [2013 ALL SCR 171] (supra) year is also
required to be taken note of. The Apex Court in paragraph-
57 reads thus :
"The position that emerges from the above discussion can be
summarised thus:
the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal
proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent
jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to
a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section
320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with
no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord
with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to
secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the
process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the
criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised
where the offender and victim have settled their dispute
would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case
and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise
of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the
nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious
offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape,
dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the
victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the
5 jg.apl.290.17.odt
dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have
serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise
between the victim and offender in relation to the offences
under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or
the offences committed by public servants while working in
that capacity etc; cannot provide for any basis for quashing
criminal proceedings involving such offences. But the
criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly
civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of
quashing, particularly the offences arising from
commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such
like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony
relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the
wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the
parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of
cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its
view, because of the compromise between the offender and
victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and
continuation of criminal case would put accused to great
oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be
caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full
and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In
other words, the High Court must consider whether it would
be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue
with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal
proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law
despite settlement and compromise between the victim and
wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is
appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the
answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High
Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the
criminal proceeding."
8. The facts in above cited judgment and the facts in the
present application are near about the same. Though offences are not
compoundable, this Court can quash and set aside the charge-sheet as
6 jg.apl.290.17.odt
per provisions of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As
such, in our opinion, present criminal application is liable to be allowed
and is, accordingly, allowed.
Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i).
JUDGE JUDGE
wasnik
