Uttarakhand High Court
C482/783/2021 on 13 July, 2021
Office Notes,
reports, orders or
proceedings or
SL. No Date COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
directions and
Registrar's order
with Signatures
IA No. 1 of 2021
IA No. 2 of 2021
In
C482 No. 783 of 2021
Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.
(Through Video Conferencing)
Mr. Gaurav Singh, Advocate for the
applicant.
Mr. V.K. Gemini, Deputy Advocate
General for the State of Uttarakhand.
Mr. Bhuwan Bhatt, Advocate for the
complainant.
The present C-482 Application, was
preferred by the applicant, questioning the
chargesheet dated 20th May, 2017, as well as
the summoning order dated 29th July, 2019,
which was passed by the 3rd Judicial
Magistrate, Haridwar, District Haridwar, in
Criminal Case No. 923 of 2019, State Vs.
Vajuhul Kamar and others, who have been
tried for commission of the offences under
Sections 120-B, 306 and 420 IPC, registered at
Police Station Patheri, District Haridwar.
During the pendency of the C482
Application, the parties to the C-482
Application, have invoked Section 320 of the
Cr.P.C., seeking the compounding of the
offences, in the light of a settlement, which had
been arrived at between the parties, as referred
in the Compounding Application No. 1 of
2021, contending thereof that the complainant
does not want further to prosecute the present
applicant, for his alleged involvement in the
said offence, which was complained of by
virtue of an FIR, which was registered on 11th
July, 2016.
This application was vehemently
objected by the learned Deputy Advocate
General, by filing his objection, and
principally, the objection raised by the learned
Deputy Advocate General, was to the effect
that some of the offences, which have been
sought to be compounded by invoking the
provisions contained under Section 320 of the
Cr.P.C., are not compoundable and,
particularly, the offences relating to Sections
120-B and 306 IPC, and hence, he has objected
that the said Compounding Application cannot
be considered, by this Court.
In order to meet up the objection which
had been taken by the learned Deputy
Advocate General, the learned counsel for the
applicant to the Compounding Application,
was called upon to address the Court with
regard to the said objection and, in support
thereto, the counsel for the parties had supplied
a compilation of judgments, on which, they
want to place reliance, including the
judgements, rendered by this Court in
Criminal Misc. Application No. 1581 of
2014, Smt. Rajni Walia Vs. State of
Uttarakhand and another, in which, also the
composition aspect was considered in relation
to the composition of an offence under Section
306 IPC.
This Court, after considering the facts
and circumstances of the said case and,
particularly, the aspect that, once the parties to
a lis have entered into the compromise and then
still forcing upon a litigation on the parties,
who have compounded their offences, would
be absolutely a futile exercise and would
amount to be having an affect of imposition of
the proceedings on the parties.
Similar view was also taken by yet
another Coordinate Bench in Criminal Misc.
Application No. 793 of 2019, Nishan Singh
and others Vs. State of Uttarakhand and
another, whereby, the Coordinate Bench
while considering the implications of the
judgment of Nikhil Merchant Vs. CBI and
another, as reported in (2008) 9 SCC 650, as
well as that of Gian Singh Vs. State of
Punjab and another, as reported in (2013) 1
SCC (Cri) 160 and the judgment of B.S. Joshi
and others Vs. State of Haryana and another
as reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, which has
dealt with as to what would be the scope of the
exercise of powers in exercising its inherent
jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for the
purposes of considering the offences, which are
not compoundable under Section 320 Cr.P.C.
Considering the impact, the Coordinate Bench
by the judgment of 28.02.2020, has
compounded the offence.
Similarly, this Court had also an
occasion to deal with the aspect of the scope of
the composition by the High Courts, while
exercising the powers under Section 482
Cr.P.C. in relation to the offence punishable
under Section 307 IPC, in Pan Singh Rana Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and another, as
rendered in Criminal Misc. Application
No.1538 of 2018, which was adjudicated by
this Court on 28th September, 2018, and after
quite elaborate deliberation, the offence under
Section 307 IPC has been held to be
compoundable particularly when the Court
exercises its inherent powers under Section 482
Cr.P.C or Article 226 of the Constitution of
India because that cannot be clouded by the
limitations or the restrictions of Section 320 of
the Cr.P.C..
An identical view was taken by the High
Court of Jharkhand in Cr.M.P. No. 1003 of
2008, in Rita Singh @ Rita Devi Vs. State of
Jharkhand and another.
In view of the aforesaid, and particularly
considering the terms and conditions, which
has been arrived at between the parties, as
expressed in the Compounding Application,
since the complainant does not want to
prosecute the present applicant any further, for
his alleged involvement in the commission of
the offences, which have been complained of
and which is a subject matter of trial in
Criminal Case No. 923 of 2019, State Vs.
Vajuhul Kamar and others, the Compounding
Application would stand allowed, and thereto,
the entire proceedings of the Criminal Case No.
923 of 2019, State Vs. Vajuhul Kamar and
others, presently pending before the Court of
3rd Judicial Magistrate, Haridwar, is also
hereby quashed.
Subject to the above, the C-482
Application stands disposed of.
(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.)
Dated 13.07.2021
Shiv
