Sanjeev Kumar Verma And Another ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 2391 UK

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
       Criminal Writ Petition No. 1187 of 2023
                         With
         Compounding Application IA No.1 of 2023

Sanjeev Kumar Verma and Another              ......Petitioners

                             Vs.

State of Uttarakhand and Others            ..... Respondents

Mr. Vaibhav Singh Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. K.S. Rawal, A.G.A. for the State.
Mr. Pranav Singh, Advocate for the respondent nos. 3, 4 and 5.

                       (JUDGMENT)
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)

The petitioners-Sanjeev Kumar Verma

and Sujata Verma seek quashing of the FIR No.11 of

2023, dated 11.01.2023, under Section 306 IPC, Police

Station Kankhal, District- Haridwar, on the basis of

amicable settlement between the parties. A joint

compounding application has been filed along with the

affidavits.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and

perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the nephew of the

respondent no.3, the informant, committed suicide

and forwarded a suicide note to the informant. The

suicide note is enclosed along with the FIR. According

to the suicide note, the parents of the deceased were

staying with the petitioners. The deceased is the son of

the younger brother of the petitioner no.1. The suicide

note records that the petitioners had asked the

deceased to take his parents away from his house, due

to which, in helpless position, the deceased committed

suicide.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would

submit that it is a family dispute; merely, based on the

suicide note, the FIR has been lodged; the parties have

settled the dispute amicably.

5. Learned State Counsel would submit that

it is not a compoundable offence. In the case of State

of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others,

(2019) 5 SCC 688, the Supreme Court has directed

that such compounding should not be permitted

during investigation. He would also submit that there

is death of a person; investigation is still going on and

there is credible evidence against the petitioners.

6. Compounding in non-compoundable

offences may be permitted by this Court under Article

226 of the Constitution of India. There have been

guidelines laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

umpteen number of cases. The general rule is that in

heinous offences, such compounding is not permitted.

7. Insofar as directions in the case of Laxmi

Narayan (supra) is concerned, particularly, in

Paragraph 15.4, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has laid

down guidelines for the offences punishable under

Section 307 IPC not for the offences under Section 306

IPC. It is true that in Paragraph 15.2, in the case of

Laxmi Narayan (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court

has also observed that the power to permit

compounding may not be exercised in such cases,

which involved heinous and serious offences of mental

depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.

8. It is a case of suicide by a young boy of

24 years of age, as stated at Bar. He happened to be

nephew of the petitioner nos. 1 and 2 (Son of the

younger brother of the petitioner no.1) and son of the

sister of the informant. The suicide note, which has

been filed, speaks that since the petitioners had

required the deceased to take his parents away from

their house, the deceased committed suicide. The

Court does not intend to go into the merits of the case

as to whether any offence of abetment to suicide is

made out in this case or not, but, definitely, it is not a

case of such gravity, which may attract the category of

cases, as given in Paragraph 15.2 of the judgment in

the case of Laxmi Narayan (supra).

9. The petitioners, the respondent no.3, the

maternal uncle of the deceased and the respondent

nos. 4 and 5, the parents of the deceased are present

in person before the Court. They are identified by their

respective counsel. They have submitted that it was a

family dispute. They have accepted the compromise.

10. Having considered all the attending

factors, this Court is of the view that it is a case, which

may be decided on the basis of amicable settlement

between the parties. Accordingly, the petition deserves

to be allowed.

11. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The

FIR No.11 of 2023, dated 11.01.2023, under Section

306 IPC, Police Station Kankhal, District- Haridwar, is

hereby quashed.

12. Compounding Application No. 01 of 2023

stands disposed of, accordingly.

(Ravindra Maithani, J.) 22.08.2023 Ravi Bisht