Uttarakhand High Court
Tonu @ Jasveer And Others ... vs State Of Uttarakhand And Others on 28 November, 2023
Author: Ravindra Maithani
Bench: Ravindra Maithani
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT
NAINITAL
Criminal Writ Petition No.1585 of 2023
With
Compounding Application IA No.1 of 2023
Tonu @ Jasveer and Others ....Petitioners
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and Others ....Respondents
Present:-
Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr. Vipul Painuly, Brief Holder for the State.
Mr. Ashok Kumar Beniwal, Advocate for the respondent
nos.3 and 4, through video conferencing.
JUDGMENT
Hon'ble Ravindra Maithani, J. (Oral)
The petitioners Tonu @ Jasveer, Tarun @ Sagar,
Harshit and Sunni seek quashing of Case Crime No.762 of
2023, under Sections 307 and 506 IPC, Police Station
Manglour, 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, on 14.09.2023, at about
5:30 PM, the petitioners fired at the informant Aman, due to
which, he sustained injuries.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners would
submit that offence under Section 307 IPC is not made out;
parties have settled the dispute; the informant has settled the
case with the petitioners; now there are no chances of
conviction. Therefore, no purpose would be served if the
investigation is allowed to continue.
5. The compounding is permissible even in non
compoundable cases, but then, there are various guidelines
laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in umpteen cases.
The law on the subject, particularly for the offences under
Section 307 IPC, has been laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi
Narayan and Others, (2019) 5 SCC 688. The Hon'ble Supreme
Court, in Para 15.4 laid down the guidelines and observed as
hereunder:-
"15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the
Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous
and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as
crime against the society and not against the
individual alone, and therefore, the criminal
proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC
and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact
on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers
under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the
parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst
themselves. 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 framing 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. However, such an
exercise by the High Court would be permissible only
after the evidence is collected after investigation and
the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or
during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when
the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the
ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the
decision of this Court in Narinder Singh v. State of
Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54
should be read harmoniously and to be read as a
whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;"
6. In the instant case, admittedly, injured Aman
sustained firearm injuries. Now, what would be its effect?
Under what provision of law this injury would be categorised?
This and many more questions would definitely find answer
during investigation or trial, as the case may be. But, insofar
as the leave to compound the offence by this Court is
concerned, in such cases, this exercise, in the words of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court, would be permissible, "only after
the evidence is collected after investigation and the
charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the
trial." It is not that stage yet. Therefore, the petition for
compounding the offence under Section 307 IPC, in which
there is a firearm injury, cannot be entertained and deserves
to be dismissed.
7. The petition is dismissed.
(Ravindra Maithani, J.)
28.11.2023
Ravi Bisht
