Himachal Pradesh High Court
Akash Nagpal vs State Of Himachal Pradesh And Others on 4 January, 2023
Author: Sandeep Sharma
Bench: Sandeep Sharma
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CrMMO Nos. 1185-1186 of 2022
Decided on: January 4, 2023
________________________________________________________
1. CrMMO No. 1185 of 2022
Akash Nagpal .........Petitioner
.
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ...Respondents
2. CrMMO No. 1186 of 2022
Kamlesh Kumar and another .........Petitioners
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh and others ...Respondents
________________________________________________________
Coram
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting
________________________________________________________
CrMMO No. 1185 of 2022
For the petitioner: Mr. Saurabh Ahluwalia, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma,
Additional Advocates General, for
respondents Nos. 1 & 2.
Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate, for
respondents Nos. 3 and 4.
CrMMO No. 1186 of 2022
For the petitioners: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Advocate.
For the respondents: Mr. Rajan Kahol and Mr. B.C. Verma,
Additional Advocates General, for
respondents Nos. 1 & 2.
Mr. Saurabh Ahluwalia, Advocate, for
respondents Nos. 3 to 5.
________________________________________________________
Sandeep Sharma, J. (oral)
By way of CrMMO No. 1185 of 2022, prayer has been made on behalf of complainant Akash Nagpal for quashing of FIR No. 44, dated 27.2.2016 under Ss. 341, 323, 506 and 34 IPC, registered against Kamlesh and Hans Raj, respondents Nos. 3 and 4 and by way of another CrMMO No. 1186 of 2022, complainant and injured, Kamlesh ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -2- Kumar and Hans Raj have prayed for quashing of FIR No. 45, dated 27.2.2016 under Ss. 323, 341, 324, 326, 506 and 34 IPC registered against accused Akash Nagpal, Anurag Bassi and Krishan Lal, .
respondents Nos .3 to 5. Both the FIRs have been registered at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh.
2. Precisely, the facts of the case, as emerge from the record, are that the FIR No. 44 of 2016 came to be filed on behalf of the petitioner Akash Nagpal, who alleged that on 27.2.2016, while he had come back from night duty to the house, at 3.30 pm he alongwith Sandeep Kumar had gone to Thakurdwara temple. He alleged that when they were about to reach the temple, Kamlesh and Hansraj obstructed their path and started abusing them and when he objected to this, Kamlesh, who had sickle in his hand, attacked him with sickle as a result of which he suffered grievous injury on his right hand. He further alleged that Krishan Lal reached the spot and rescued him as well as Sandeep from clutches of Kamlesh and Hans Raj. In another FIR No. 45, Hans Raj alleged that that on 27.2.2016, he alongwith his brother, Kamlesh had gone towards Bali forest to graze his cattle and at 3.30 pm, while they were coming back to their home, Akash Nagpal, Anurag Bassi and Krishan Lal, abused Kamlesh and when he objected to this,, Akash Nagpal alongwith his brother snatched sickle from hand of Hans Raj firstly and then attacked them with the same, due to which he suffered grievous injuries.
::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -3-3. Though after completion of investigation police has presented Challan in the both the cases but before the same could be taken to logical end, parties have resolved to settle the dispute inter se .
them amicably and approached this Court, for quashing of FIR's alongwith consequential proceedings, pending in the competent court of law.
4. Vide orders dated 19.12.2022 passed in both the cases, this court, while directing respondent-State to verify the factum with regard to compromise, if any, inter se parties, also deemed it necessary to cause presence of the parties, especially the complainant(s), so that factum with regard to compromise entered into between the parties could be ascertained.
5. Pursuant to orders dated 19.12.2022, respondent-State has filed status report in CrMMO No. 1185 of 2022, perusal whereof reveals that pursuant to the complaint filed by Akash Nagpal, case was registered against Kamlesh Kumar and Hans Raj, but there is no mention, if any, of the compromise entered into between the parties.
However, the parties are present in the court, who state on oath that they have settled the matter with each other, of their own volition and without there being external pressure. They have apologized for their behaviour and will not repeat such acts in future. Both the parties also state that the FIR's were lodged by them against each other due to misunderstanding, which has been resolved and they have no objection in case, FIR's lodged against each other by them are ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -4- quashed and set aside and accused in both the cases are acquitted of the charges framed against them. Their statements recorded on oath are taken on record.
.
6. After having perused the statements of both the parties, Mr. Rajan Kahol, learned Additional Advocate General states that though the accused in both the cases have committed serious offences, but since the matter stands compromised inter se parties, chances of conviction of accused are bleak and remote, as such, State shall have no objection in case prayer of the complainants in both the cases, for
7.
r to quashing of FIR's is accepted and accused are acquitted of the charges framed against tthem.
The question which now needs consideration is whether FIR's in question can be ordered to be quashed when Hon'ble Apex Court in Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another (2014)6 SCC 466 has specifically held that power under S. 482 CrPC is not to be exercised in the cases which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society.
8. At this stage, it would be relevant to take note of the judgment passed by Hon'ble Apex Court in Narinder Singh (supra), whereby the Hon'ble Apex Court has formulated guidelines for accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -5- proceedings. Perusal of judgment referred to above clearly depicts that in para 29.1, Hon'ble Apex Court has returned the findings that power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished .
from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable and where the parties have settled the matter between themselves, however, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with great caution. In para Nos. 29 to 29.7 of
9.
r to the judgment Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down certain parameters to be followed, while compounding offences.
Careful perusal of para 29.3 of the judgment suggests that such a power is not to be exercised in the cases which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Apart from this, offences committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes may be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -6-10. The Hon'ble Apex Court in case Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303 has held that power of the High Court in quashing of the criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint in .
exercise of its inherent power is distinct and different from the power of a Criminal Court for compounding offences under Section 320 Cr.PC.
Even in the judgment passed in Narinder Singh's case, the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that while exercising inherent power of quashment under Section 482 Cr.PC the Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime and its social impact and it cautioned the Courts not to exercise the power for quashing proceedings in heinous and serious offences of mental depravity, murder, rape, dacoity etc. However subsequently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Dimpey Gujral and Ors. vs. Union Territory through Administrator, UT, Chandigarh and Ors. (2013( 11 SCC 497 has further reiterated that continuation of criminal proceedings would tantamount to abuse of process of law because the alleged offences are not heinous offences showing extreme depravity nor are they against the society. Hon'ble Apex Court further observed that when offences of a personal nature, burying them would bring about peace and amity between the two sides.
11. Hon'ble Apex Court in its judgment dated 4th October, 2017, titled as Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others versus State of Gujarat and Another, passed in Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017 arising out of SLP(Crl) No.9549 of 2016, ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -7- reiterated the principles/ parameters laid down in Narinder Singh's case supra for accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings.
12. Careful perusal of para 29.3 of the judgment suggests that .
such a power is not to be exercised in the cases which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Apart from this, offences committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by Public Servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed r to merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes may be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves.
13. In the case at hand, the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused do not pertain to offence of moral turpitude or heinous offences rather the offences alleged to have been committed are petty offences and more over compromise has been arrived at inter se parties, as such, no fruitful purpose would be served in continuing with criminal prosecution of the petitioner, more so when the complainant has compromised the matter with the accused and she is also no more interested in pursuing the case further. Otherwise also, there are bleak and remote chances of conviction of accused and ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS -8- as such, this court sees no impediment in accepting the prayer made by petitioners for quashing of FIR.
14. Consequently, in view of the aforesaid discussion as well as .
law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court (supra), FIR No. 44, dated 27.2.2016 under Ss. 323, 326, 506 and 34 IPC and FIR No. 45, dated 27.2.2016 under Ss. 323, 341, 324, 326, 506 and 34 IPC, both registered at Police Station Nalagarh, District Solan, Himachal Pradesh are quashed and set aside in their entirety alongwith consequential proceedings i.e. Police challans Nnos. 1032 of 2016 titled State v.
Kamlesh kumar and Police Challan No. 1720 of 2016 titled State v.
Akash Nagpal, arising out of aforesaid respective FIR's, pending in the court of learned, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nalagarh are quashed and set aside. Accused in both the proceedings are acquitted of the charges framed against them. , The petitions stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms, alongwith all pending applications.
Copy Dasti.
(Sandeep Sharma) Judge January 4, 2023 (Vikrant) ::: Downloaded on - 04/01/2023 20:34:46 :::CIS