Deepak Kumar vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 3718 UK

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND

                              AT NAINITAL

 Criminal Misc. Application (C-482) No. 1067 of 2021



Deepak Kumar                                           .....Applicant
                              Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others                     ......Respondents

Mr. Lalit Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant.
Mr. Lalit Miglani, learned A.G.A. for the State.
Mr. P.C. Petshali, learned counsel for the private respondents.


                                            Dated: 20th September, 2021

Hon'ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

By way of present application, moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. the applicant seeks to quash the Charge Sheet dated 06.05.2021, Cognizance order dated 02.08.2021 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3726 of 2021, "State Vs. Deepak Kumar" for the offence punishable under Sections 308, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/2nd Civil Judge (Sr. Div), Udham Singh Nagar.

2. In support of compounding application (IA No. 1 of 2021), affidavits have been filed by Shri Deepak Kumar (applicant) and by Smt. Sapna (respondent no. 2/informant) who is also representing the victim/respondent no. 3 (being the minor son of respondent no. 2). It has been submitted that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and the injured do not want to prosecute the

accused applicant. On 07.09.2021, the applicant and respondent nos. 2 who is also representing the victim/respondent no. 3 (being the minor son of respondent no. 2) were present before the Court, duly identified by their respective counsel. They also admitted the facts mentioned in the compounding application.

3. Learned State Counsel opposed the compounding application and contended that offence under Section 308 of IPC, for which the accused applicant is facing trial, is non-compoundable and also submitted that the injuries are grievous in nature.

4. Learned Counsel for the accused applicant contended that the injuries are grievous in nature and not dangerous for life. Learned Counsel placed reliance on a recent judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein it has been observed as under:

"Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be generally treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to proving the charge under Section 307 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/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the settlement

and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in the latter case it would be permissible for the High Court to accept the plea compounding the offence based on complete settlement between the parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship."

5. Needless to say, non-compoundable offences cannot be compounded. But considering the nature of injuries, above authority of the Hon'ble Apex Court and also the proposition of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I. & Ors, (2008) 9 SCC 677; B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, and in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, where there is a genuine compromise and there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and continuance of the proceedings, after the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, would be a futile exercise, the compromise should be accepted and the proceedings should be quashed.

6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal proposition propounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court, compounding application is allowed. Compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted.

7. Consequently, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3726 of 2021, "State Vs. Deepak Kumar" for the offence punishable under Sections 308, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/2nd Civil Judge (Sr. Div),

Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed, so far it relates to the applicant only. The Present criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of accordingly. Inform the Court concerned accordingly.

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 20.09.2021 SB