Telangana High Court
Jangam Anil Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 6 February, 2024
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K.SUJANA
I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023
in/and
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9947 of 2023
ORDER:
It is submitted by learned counsels appearing for the
petitioners as well as the respondent No.2, that during
pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have
compromised the matter and accordingly, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of
2023 have been filed to record the compromise between them
and to compound the offences.
2. Vide order dated 07.12.2023, this Court directed the
parties along with their respective counsels to appear before
the Secretary, High Court Legal Services Committee, High
Court for the State of Telangana, Hyderabad, for identification
and to submit a report.
3. Pursuant to the above said direction issued by this Court,
the parties appeared and the Secretary, High Court Legal
Services Committee, has identified the parties and submitted
report dated 21.12.2023 and the same is placed on record.
SKS, J
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the
matter has been settled out of the Court and prayed the Court
to record the compromise.
5. On the other hand, learned Public Prosecutor opposed
the compromise stating that Section 307 of IPC is non
compoundable offence and he also relied upon the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl.A. No.349 of 2019 wherein
in paragraph No.14, it is held as follows....
"Insofar as the present case is concerned, the High
Court has quashed the criminal proceedings for the offences
under Sections 307 and 34 IPC mechanically and even when
the investigation was under progress. Somehow, the accused
managed to enter into a compromise with the complainant and
sought quashing of the FIR on the basis of a settlement. The
allegations are serious in nature. He used the fire arm also in
commission of the offence. Therefore, the gravity of the
offence and the conduct of the accused is not at all considered
by the High Court and solely on the basis of a settlement
between the accused and the complainant, the High Court has
mechanically quashed the FIR, in exercise of power under
Section 482 of the Code, which is not sustainable in the eyes of
law. The High Court has also failed to note the antecedents of
the accused."
SKS, J
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further submitted that
though it is mentioned in paragraph No.14 that Section 307 of
IPC cannot be compounded, in paragraph No.13(iv), it is
observed that it would be open to the High Court to examine
as to whether incorporation of Section 307 of IPC is there for
the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient
evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing charge under
Section 307 of IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the
High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether
such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body,
nature of weapons used etc.,
7. He also relied on the judgment of the Hon'ble High
Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar wherein
in paragraph No.18, it is observed that it is crystal clear that
the dispute, where the wrong is basically private or personal in
nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the
High Court will be within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal
proceedings, if it is known that because of the compromise
arrived at between the parties, there is remote possibility of
securing conviction of the accused. In fact, in such cases, the
SKS, J
Supreme Court has clearly observed that it would amount to
extreme injustice, if despite settlement having been arrived at
by the parties, the criminal proceedings are allowed to
continue.
8. In the present case, the dispute is in between the wife
and husband and there are no serious allegations to attract
Section 307 of IPC. Both the parties have amicably settled the
disputes between themselves.
9. Considering the observation of the Judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in paragraph No.13(iv) and also
judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Jammu and Kashmir
and Ladakh at Srinagar in paragraph No.14, I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of
2023 are allowed. Consequently, this Criminal Petition is
allowed and the proceedings in F.I.R. No.144 of 2023 on the
file of the Warangal Women Police Station, Warangal against
the petitioners/A1 to A4 are hereby quashed subject to the
petitioners paying an amount of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five
Thousand Only) to the Director, Sainik Welfare, Hyderabad
(Savings A/c.No.52188926279, State Bank of India,
SKS, J
Shantinagar Branch (20070), IFSC Code :SBIN0020070,
MICR No.500004057) and Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand
Only) to the Telangana High Court Advocates Association,
Hyderabad, within a period of two (02) weeks from today and
file proof of the same before the Registry.
Miscellaneous applications, if any pending, shall stand
closed.
____________________
JUSTICE K.SUJANA
Date: 06.02.2024
NOTE: Registry is directed to
upload/supply certified copy of the order
only after payment of above said amount.
Bw/LPD
SKS, J
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE K.SUJANA
I.A.Nos.2 and 3 of 2023
in/and
CRIMINAL PETITION No.9947 of 2023
Date: 06.02.2024
NOTE: Registry is directed to
upload/supply certified copy of the order
only after payment of above said amount.
Bw/LPD
