Bombay High Court
Mohammad Hussain @ Babu Suleman ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 9 March, 2022
Bench: V.K. Jadhav, Sandipkumar Chandrabhan More
1 979 appln 2681-21
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
979 CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.2681 OF 2021
WITH APPLN/2909/2021
RIJWAN AHMED AALIM AHMED UUREAHI AND OTHERA
VERAUA
THE ATATE OF MAHARAAHTRA AND ANOTHER
...
Advocate for Applicants : Mr. Ahaikh Mazhar A. Jahagirdar
APP for Respondent no.1-Atate: Mr. R. V. Dasalkar
Advocate for Respondent no.2 : Mr. Vishal A. Uakde
....
CORAM : V. U. JADHAV AND
AANDIPUUMAR C. MORE, JJ.
DATED : 9th MARCH, 2022.
....
P. C. :
1. Heard fnally with consent of the parties at admission stage.
2. The applicants in both the applicants are seeking quashing of
the FIR and the proceedings on the basis of settlement. Learned
counsel appearing for the applicants in both the applications
submit that in respect of the incident occurred on same date, time
and place, both the parties have lodged complaint against each
other and accordingly two separate crimes came to be registered
which is the subject matter of the criminal applications before us.
Learned counsel appearing for both the parties submit that the
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2022 01:20:37 :::
2 979 appln 2681-21
parties are neighbourers since many years and the incident had
taken place on account of some trifing reasons. It is further
informed to us that due to intervention of the relatives and elderly
members of the society, the parties have amicably settled their
dispute. In both the matters, the original complainants have fled
affdavit in reply to that effect.
3. We have also heard the learned APP for the respondent-Atate.
Learned APP submits that so far as the applicant No.1 Riwan
Ahmed in Criminal Application No. 2681 of 2021 is concerned,
there is one crime registered against him for the offence punishable
under Aection 354 of IPC. Learned APP submits that in Criminal
Application No. 2909 of 2021 so far as applicant no.1 Mohammad
Hussain is concerned, there is a crime registered against him for
the offence punishable under Aection 160 of IPC. However, the
learned APP has fairly accepted that the present two crimes are the
out come of the free fght between the neighbours on account of
some trifing reasons. Learned APP has also accepts that in both
the crimes the injured have sustained simple injury.
4. We have carefully gone through the FIR in both the matters.
It appears that the applicants in both the applications are the
neighbourers and in respect of the incident occurred on same date,
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2022 01:20:37 :::
3 979 appln 2681-21
time and place, they have fled complaint against each other and on
the basis of which respective crimes came to be registered with the
concerned police station. The alleged incident had taken place on
account of some trifing reason. There are no serious antecedents
as such. The injured persons have sustained minor injuries. It
further appears that due to intervention of the elderly persons of
the society, the parties have arrived at amicable settlement.
5. In the case of Gian Aingh vs. Atate of Punjab and others,
reported in (2012) 10 ACC 303, in para 48 of the judgment the
Aupreme Court after referring the view expressed by the 5 judges
bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and also after
referring the guidelines framed by the said fve judges bench of the
Punjab and Haryana High Court for quashing of the proceedings
on settlement in para 61 of the judgment, has made the following
observations.
"61. 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 Aection 320 of the Code. Inherent power
is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2022 01:20:37 :::
4 979 appln 2681-21
has to be exercised in accord with the guideline
engrafted in such power viz. : (1) 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 FIR may be exercised where
the offender and the 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 fttingly quashed
even though the victim or victim's family and the
offender have settled the dispute. Auch offences are not
private in nature and have a serious impact on society.
Aimilarly, any compromise between the victim and the
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
predominatingly civil favour stand on a different footing
for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences
arising from commercial, fnancial, 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
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2022 01:20:37 :::
5 979 appln 2681-21
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 the victim,
the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and
continuation of the criminal case would put the
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 the wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of
justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to
an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in
the affrmative, the High Court shall be well within its
jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding."
6. This is a quarrel between the neighbourers and due to the
intervention of elderly persons of the society and relatives, the
parties have arrived at amicable settlement. There is nothing
serious in the allegations and even the injured persons have also
sustained minor injuries. This appears to be an individual quarrel
with no social cause involved in the matter. We are, thus, inclined
to quash the FIR and proceedings. Hence, the following order.
::: Uploaded on - 11/03/2022 ::: Downloaded on - 12/03/2022 01:20:37 :::
6 979 appln 2681-21
ORDER
I) Criminal Application No. 2681 of 2021 is
allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" subject
to costs of Rs.5000/-(Rs. Five thousand) to
be paid by the applicants to the Library,
Advocates Association of High Court
Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
II) Criminal Application No.2909 of 2021 is
allowed in terms of prayer clause "B" subject
to costs of Rs.5000/- (Rs. Five thousand) to
be paid by the applicants to the Library,
Advocates Association of High Court
Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad.
III) Both the applications are disposed of
accordingly.
(AANDIPUUMAR C. MORE, J.) (V. U. JADHAV, J.)
vsm/-
