Jharkhand High Court
Ali Irfan vs State Of Jharkhand on 21 July, 2023
1 W.P. (Cr.) No. 384 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P. (Cr.) No. 384 of 2023
Ali Irfan ... Petitioner
-Versus-
1. State of Jharkhand
2. Deepak Kachhap ... Respondents
-----
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI
-----
For the Petitioner : Mr. Rajesh Kumar, Advocate
For the State : Mrs. Rashmi Lal, A.C. to Sr. S.C.-III
For Respondent No.2 : Mr. Anjani Kumar, Advocate
-----
02/21.07.2023 This petition has been filed for quashing the entire criminal
proceeding including the FIR being SC/ST P.S. Case No.56 of 2022, pending
in the court of the learned Special Judge, SC/ST Court, Ranchi.
2. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
there is some dispute between the parties with regard to Plot no. 611,
Khata no.84, having area of 79 decimals and for that, present case has
been filed under SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. He further submits
that only due to the said dispute, unnecessarily SC/ST Act has been added.
He also submits that now good sense has prevailed between the parties and
the matter has been compromised and for that I.A. No.5922 of 2023 has
been filed.
3. Mr. Anjani Kumar, learned counsel has appeared suo motu on behalf
of respondent no.2 and submits that compromise is there and for that the
said I.A. has been filed. He further submits that both the parties have
separately affidavited the said I.A. He also submits that respondent no.2
does not want to proceed further with the case. He submits that the entire
criminal proceeding may be quashed.
4. In view of the above submission of the learned counsel for the
parties, it appears that the terms and conditions of the compromise is
disclosed in paragraphs 3 to 6 of the said I.A. and the same is supported on
the affidavit of both the sides.
5. Recently, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered the case relates
to Section 3 of the Prevention of Atrocities (Scheduled Caste and Scheduled
Tribes) Act, 1989, in Ramgopal & Anr. Versus The State of Madhya
Pradesh, in Criminal Appeal No. 1489 of 2012 along with Criminal
Appeal No. 1488 of 2012 and in that case, the compromise has been
considered and it has been held that the extraordinary power enjoined upon
a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in the Supreme Court
under Article 142 of the Constitution can be invoked. For ready reference,
para-19 of the said judgment is quoted hereinbelow:-
"19. We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section
320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the
compromise between the parties in respect of offences
'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the
extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of
the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and
bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that
such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully
in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in
mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of
the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary
nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; &
(iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the
occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant
considerations."
6. It is well settled that where the compromise is entered into between
the parties and societal interest is not there, the High Court can exercise the
power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, even if the Sections
are not compoundable.
7. In view of the aforesaid compromise and upon going through the
aforesaid I.A., this Court is inclined to invoke power conferred under Article
226 of the Constitution of India. As such, the entire criminal proceeding so
far as the petitioner is concerned is, hereby, quashed for the reasons that
must be the occurrence involved in this petition can be categorized as
purely personal or having overtones of criminal proceedings of private
nature; secondly the nature of complaint is with regard to dispute of a plot
and thirdly the cause of administration of criminal justice system would
remain unaffected on acceptance of the amicable settlement between the
parties.
8. In view of the above facts, reasons, analysis and in view of the
statements made in the aforesaid I.A., so far as the petitioner is concerned,
the entire criminal proceeding in connection with FIR being SC/ST P.S. Case
No.56 of 2022, pending in the court of the learned Special Judge, SC/ST
Court, Ranchi is hereby, quashed.
9. Accordingly, this petition is allowed and disposed of.
10. Consequently, I.A. No.5922 of 2023 is disposed of.
(Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.)
Ajay/
