Himachal Pradesh High Court
Vikas Kumar Son Of Shri vs State Of Hp. I Have Gone Through The Said ... on 24 May, 2022
Author: Vivek Singh Thakur
Bench: Vivek Singh Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
ON THE 24th DAY OF MAY, 2022 BEFORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIVEK SINGH THAKUR .
CRIMINAL MISC.PETITION (MAIN) U/S 482 CRPC NO. 44 OF 2020 Between:-
1. VIKAS KUMAR SON OF SHRI RAMESH KUMAR, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE BASSACHARD, POST OFFICE KHARINA, TEHSIL NURPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA HP AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS. r
2. KUSHAL KUMAR SON OF SHIR KARNAIL SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATT, POST OFFICE ZAUNTA, TEHSIL NURPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA H.P.
3. SHAYAM LAL, SON OF SHRI PURAN SINGH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MATT, POST OFFICE ZAUNTA, TEHSIL NURPUR, DISTRICT KANGRA H.P. ....PETITIONERS (BY SHRI ANUJ NAG, ADVOCATE) AND
1. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, THROUGH SECRETARY (HOME) TO THE GOVERNMENT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH.
2. STATION HOUSE OFFICER,NURPUR DISTRICT KANGRA HIMACHAL PRADESH
3. KUSHNIVESH SHARMA, S/O SHRI RAJENDER PRASAD, PERMANENT ::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS 2 RESIDENT OF VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE TUNDI, TEHSIL SHIUNTA DISTRICT CHAMBA H.P. ...RESPONDENTS .
(BY MS. DIVYA SOOD, DEPUTY ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R-1 &
2) (BY MS. SHIVANI, ADVOCATE VICE MR. ASHISH VERMA, ADVOCATE, FOR R- 3) Whether approved for reporting?
Judgment reserved on: 20th May, 2022 Date of Decision : 24th May, 2022 r ORDER This petition coming on for orders this day, the Court passed the following:
Petitioners have approached this Court invoking provisions of Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') for quashing of FIR No. 236 of 2019 dated 19.10.2021, registered in Police Station Nurpur, District Kangra, under Sections 323, 342, 363, 356 and 34 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC')
2 Status report stands filed, wherein it has been stated that on 19.10.2019 at about 5.20 PM police had received an information from Civil Hospital, Nurpur that a person injured in a quarrel had been brought for treatment, whereupon SI Mohinder Pal along with police officials rushed to hospital and after obtaining opinion of Medical officer, with respect to fitness of victim to make statement, statement of victim was recorded under Section 154 Cr.PC wherein he stated that he had completed diploma of Junior ::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS 3 Engineer from Sukhbinder College Dunera and earlier he was addict of drugs, but after treatment from Drugs Addiction Control Centre at Dharamshala, he was not taking any kind of drugs. Further that .
when he was addict, he acquainted with Sham Singh @ Shamu and Vicky resident of Jaunta and they were asking him to sell drugs in his area but he had refused to do so, which led to altercation between them and therefore, they were inimical towards him. Further that on 19.10.2019 complainant along with his parents came to Niazpur for purchasing clothes of marriage.
3 At about 3 PM after taking permission from his parents, complainant came to Nurpur bazar for hair cutting and when he reached on bifurcation of road, Shamu and Vicky, coming in Innova car, met him along with two other boys. First of all, they beat him and abducted him in vehicle at Khushinagar and deboarded him there and again thrashed him at that place and thereafter snatching his two mobile phones, left the place in their vehicle. Thereafter, victim/complainant contacted his parents somehow who brought him to Nurpur hospital for treatment. On the basis of aforesaid statement, FIR was registered and challan was presented, which is pending adjudication in the trial Court.
4 State was directed to file status report and antecedents of petitioners. Apart from aforesaid information, learned Additional Advocate General has placed on record communication received from SHO, Police Station Nurpur wherein it has been informed that ::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS 4 petitioner No. 3 Shayam Lal @ Sham, since 2009 to 2021, has been found involved in commission of offence in seven criminal cases i.e. in case FIR Nos. 345 of 2009, 289 of 2014, 126 of 2016, 361 of 2020, .
88 of 2021, 165 of 2021 and 236 of 2019, whereas petitioner No.1 Vikas @ Vicky and petitioner No.2 Kushal Kumar are involved in commission of offence in the present case only.
5 Learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that now matter stands compromised, therefore FIR and criminal proceedings against the petitioners, initiated in furtherance thereto, deserve to be quashed.
6It has been further submitted that petitioner No.1 has been appointed in Government job whereas pendency of present case is coming in his way in joining the job whereas he has not been found involved in any other case prior to or after the incident in question.
7. It has been further submitted on behalf of petitioners that in fact respondent No.3 was not beaten but there was free fighting between petitioners and respondent No.3, who were well known to each other prior to incident and they quarreled because of misunderstanding which now stands removed and therefore, petition deserves to be allowed.
8 Perusal of contents of FIR as well as compromise placed on record indicates that the facts are contrary to the aforesaid submissions as stated in compromise. It has been stated in FIR that ::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS 5 petitioners were pressing the complainant to sell drugs in his area and on refusal to do so, he was thrashed. Thrashing is substantiated from Clause IV of compromise wherein it has been stated that .
second party has paid all medical expenses indicating that complainant was injured in incident. Had it been fight between two groups or two persons, then injury to other party was inevitable but it is not so as per compromise.
9 Though it has been claimed that Vikas Kumar has been appointed in some Government job and therefore, in the interest of justice and future career of petitioner No.1, FIR deserves to be quashed. However, there is nothing on record to substantiate the claim of petitioner No.1. Had it been so, there must have been some documents placed on record or it would have been mentioned in compromise also but neither in petition nor in compromise it has been stated so.
10 Learned counsel for petitioners has placed on record the reliance of judgment dated 4th February, 2021 passed by Coordinate Bench in Cr.MMO No. 30 of 2021, titled Surender Kumar vs. State of HP. I have gone through the said judgment wherein various pronouncements of Supreme Court have been referred to conclude that this Court under Section 482 Cr.PC is empowered to quash the FIR and powers under Section 482 Cr.PC are not inhibited by any other provisions of law for exercising the discretion to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings in given facts and circumstances.
::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS 6There is no quarrel with respect to aforesaid principle and ratio laid down in pronouncements referred in aforesaid judgment, but in peculiar facts and circumstances, particularly in absence of any .
material to substantiate that pendency of the case is coming in the way of petitioner Vikas to join Government job coupled with previous criminal history of petitioner No.3 Shayam @ Sham, who is main accused, I do not find fit to exercise jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the FIR and criminal proceedings in present case.
11 Needless to say that petitioners shall have right to file afresh petition with better particulars or in the changed/additional circumstances, if occasion arises to do so and if so advised.
With aforesaid observations, present petition is dismissed.
May 24, 2022 (Vivek Singh Thakur)
(ms) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 26/05/2022 20:04:45 :::CIS