Sri Deepak V vs State Of Karnataka
2021 Latest Caselaw 1231 Kant

                            :1:



 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

      DATED THIS THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2021

                         BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR

         CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3335 OF 2017

BETWEEN
Sri. Deepak V
S/o T Venkataswamappa
Aged about 40 years
Residing at No.169, D.T. Road
Kothanur Village/Post
Bangalore - 560 077.
                                            ... Petitioner
(By Sri. Srinivas N, Advocate)

AND
1.    State of Karnataka
      By Hennur Police Station
      Bangalore - 560 077
      SPP, High Court of Karnataka
      Bangalore - 560 001.

2.    Sri. Venkatesh
      S/o Late Chikkayallappa
      Aged about 49 years
      Residing at No.78
      Vrushabadri Nilaya
      Horamavu Post
      Bangalore - 560 077.
                                         ... Respondents

(By Smt. Rashmi Jadhav, HCGP for R-1;
    Sri. C S Vinod - Advocate for R-2)
                              :2:



      This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, praying to quash the FIR
registration of case pending against him in Cr.No.26/2017
for the offence punishable under Sections 504 and 506 of
IPC and Sec.3(1)(x) of SC/ST (POA) Act pending on the file
of II-Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge and Special
Judge, Bangalore.

      This Criminal Petition coming on for Admission, this
day, the court made the following:


                         ORDER

Sri Srinivas.N., learned counsel for the petitioner,

Sri C.S.Vinod, learned counsel for respondent No.2 and

learned HCGP for respondent No.1 are present before the

Court.

2. An application under Section 320 r/w Section 482

of Cr.P.C. and Chapter IV(A) Section 15A(5) of the SC/ST

(POA) Act along with a joint memo has been filed by the

petitioner and second respondent to dispose of this

petition in terms stated therein and they have subscribed

their signatures inclusive of their respective counsel in the

joint memo.

3. In the application it is stated that the

petitioner/accused had filed the present petition seeking

to quash the FIR in Cr.No.26/2017 for the offence

punishable under Section 504 and 506 of IPC and Section

3(1)(x) of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act pending

on the file of II Addl.City Civil and Sessions Judge and

Special Judge, Bangalore which was filed by the

respondent No.2/complainant.

4. Further, it is stated that the petitioner and second

respondent on the intervention of their well wishers have

sorted out all their differences. Further it is submitted

that the second respondent is also undertaking to file an

affidavit to the said effect. Therefore, they seek permission

of this Court to compound the offences as mentioned

above.

5. In this regard, it is relevant to refer Chapter IVA

Section 15A (5) of the SC/ST (POA) Act which reads as

under:

"A victim or his dependent shall be entitled to be heard at any proceeding under this Act in respect of bail, discharge, release, parole, conviction or sentence of an accused or any connected proceedings or arguments and file written submission on conviction, acquittal or sentencing."

6. In the instant case, the case in Crime No.26/2017

which is pending before the Court of II Additional City

Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru as wherein the FIR

has been submitted for proceeding further in respect of

investigation and so also, to file report as contemplated

under Section 173(2) of Cr.P.C. or any other proceedings.

7. In the meanwhile of the proceedings, the

petitioner and second respondent are seeking for

compounding of the offences by filing this joint memo.

Therefore, it is relevant to refer Gian Singh vs. State of

Punjab (2012 (10) SCC 303) wherein the Hon'ble

Supreme Court of India had extensively dealt with matters

relating to Section 482 Cr.P.C. and Section 320 Cr.P.C.

relating to the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

to quash the proceedings in respect of compoundable

offences where compromise is arrived at between the

parties. It has been held in the said judgment that

criminal proceedings can be quashed by the Court, if the

Court is satisfied that the matter has been settled between

the parties amicably and the parties are interested to

restore peace and harmony between them. 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.

8. Section 482 saves the inherent power of the High

Court and it reads as follows :

"Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent powers of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to

prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice."

9. Section 482 of the Code, as its very language

suggests, saves the inherent power of the High Court

which it has by virtue of it being a superior court to

prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to

secure the ends of justice. It begins with the words,

'nothing in this Code' which means that the provision is

an overriding provision. These words leave no manner of

doubt that none of the provisions of the Code limits or

restricts the inherent power. The guideline for exercise of

such power is provided in Section 482 itself i.e., to prevent

abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure

the ends of justice. As has been repeatedly stated that

Section 482 confers no new powers on High Court; it

merely safeguards existing inherent powers possessed by

High Court necessary to prevent abuse of the process of

any Court or to secure the ends of justice. It is equally

well settled that the power is not to be resorted to if there

is specific provision in the Code for the redress of the

grievance of an aggrieved party. It should be exercised

very sparingly and it should not be exercised as against

the express bar of law engrafted in any other provision of

the Code.

10. In the instant case, the petitioner who is

arraigned as accused is seeking to exercise the power

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C for quashing of the criminal

proceedings initiated against him in Crime No.26/2017 for

the offences as reflected in the FIR said to have been

recorded by the respondent police. However, the

petitioner/accused and respondent No.2/complainant

have come forwarded by filing this application along with

joint memo seeking permission to compound the offences

and closing the issues which emerged between them.

However, in this matter there is social impact of the crime

in question vis-à-vis individual impact. Therefore, it

deserves for consideration of the application filed by the

petitioner/accused and so also respondent

No.2/complainant. The complainant has filed affidavit in

support of the joint memo and he is not inclined to

persuade with the proceedings. Therefore, it is deemed

appropriate to consider the application and joint memo

along with affidavit seeking closure of the proceedings in

the interest of harmonious relationship to be continued

between them. In terms of the above, I proceed to pass

the following:

ORDER

The criminal petition filed by the petitioner/accused

under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed akin to the

application filed by the parties under Section 320 r/w 482

of Cr.P.C. and so also, Chapter IV(A) Section 15(A)(5) of

the SC/ST Act (POA) Act, 1989. Consequently, the

proceedings in Crime No.26/2017 pending against the

petitioner/accused before the II Addl.City Civil and

Sessions Judge and Spl.Judge, Bengaluru City are hereby

quashed.

Sd/-

JUDGE

DKB