Allahabad High Court
Santosh Kumar Singh And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 March, 2020
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8331 of 2020 Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shachindra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Prakash Mishra,Sharda Prasad Pandey Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Vakalatnama alongwith affidavit filed by Shri Sharda Prasad on behalf of O.P. No.2 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and learned A.G.A.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.PC has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 19.6.2019, entire proceeding as well as charge sheet dated 21.5.l2018 of Case No. 856/2019 State Vs. Santosh Singh and other, arising out of case crime no. 84/2018 under section 147, 149, 386, 506, 307 I.P.C. pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Room No.10, District Allahabad.
As per the allegations made in the FIR, it is alleged that on 19.2.2018 at about 6-7 a.m. the applicants armed with country made pistol reached at the place of incident and in order to create terror made several round fire and snatched money from the boatman and threatened them that in case they operate their boats they will have to pay Rs. 400/- per boat else their contractor will be done to death. An F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant vide case crime no. 84/2018 under section 147, 149, 386, 506, 307 I.P.C.
After registration of F.I.R. the police thoroughly investigated the matter and after collecting relevant evidence and material submitted charge sheet against the applicants on 21.5.2018 under section 147, 149, 386, 506, 307 I.P.C on which learned magistrate has taken cognizance on 19.6.2019 and trial remained pending.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into a compromise and has filed an affidavit dated 3.2.2020 to the effect that in view of the said compromise they do not want to further pursue the proceedings and the entire proceedings be quashed.
Learned counsel for O.P. No.2 has also submitted that a compromise has been made between the parties and in view of the same he does not want to further pursue the proceedings and he has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.
Per contra, learned AGA has opposed the said prayer and has submitted that the offence under Sections 147,149, 386, 307 I.P.C. are non-compoundable and as such, they cannot be quashed merely on the ground that the parties have entered into a compromise.
He has further submitted that in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.PC, while dealing with the plea that the dispute has been settled, the nature and gravity of the offence is to be kept in the mind. Heinous and serious offence involving mental depravity cannot appropriately be quashed on the ground that the victim or family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences truly speaking are not private in nature but have a serious impact upon the society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the over riding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences.
He has further submitted that in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Hon. Apex Court has observed that in respect of offence against the society, it is the duty to punish the offender. Hence, even when there is settlement between offender and the victim, the same shall not prevail, since it is in the interest of justice and that of the society that offender should be punished, which acts as deterrent for others from committing similar crimes.
Learned AGA has further submitted that in a recent judgment passed in the case of Arun Singh Vs. State of U.P. through Chief Secretary and others in Criminal Appeal No. 250 of 2020, Hon'ble Apex Court has held that the offences, which are serious in nature and are offence against the society even when there is a settlement between the offender and the victim, the same shall not be quashed as it is in the interest of society that the offender be punished, which may act as deterrent for others for committing similar crimes.
In view of the above, the prayer for quashing the entire proceedings on the basis of compromise made between the parties cannot be accepted, which would be deterrent to the social interest and as such, present application under Section 482 C.PC being bereft of merit is accordingly dismissed.
Order Date :- 5.3.2020 R