Himachal Pradesh High Court
Mahesh Thakur S/O Late Sh. Dila Ram ... vs State Of H.P. & Another ... on 20 May, 2016
Author: P. S. Rana
Bench: P. S. Rana
HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA.
Cr.MMO No. 90/2016
Reserved on : 28th April 2016
.
Date of order: 20th May 2016
Mahesh Thakur s/o late Sh. Dila Ram Thakur & Others
.....Petitioners
Versus
State of H.P. & Another ......Non-petitioners
of
Coram:
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. S. Rana, Judge.
rt
Whether approved for reporting? Yes1
For petitioners : Mr. Naresh Sharma, Advocate
For non-petitioner No.1: Mr. M. L. Chauhan, Addl.A.G. with Mr.
R. K. Sharma, Dy.A.G.
For non-petitioner No.2: Mr. Nitin Thakur, Advocate
P. S. Rana, J. (Oral)
ORDER Present petition is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 for quashing proceedings of learned Trial Court initiated under Sections 498-A and 323 read with Section 34 IPC. It is submitted by learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners that out of Court settlement executed inter se parties. It is further submitted by learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners that complainant namely Sheetal is residing with her husband namely Mahesh Thakur. Prayer for acceptance of petition sought.
1Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:24:12 :::HCHP 2
2. Per contra response filed on behalf of State of H.P. pleaded therein that FIR No.176/2015 dated 14.05.2015 is registered under Sections 498-A and 323 read with Section 34 IPC and final report of .
investigation submitted before criminal Court. It is pleaded that complainant namely Sheetal is at liberty to file application under Section 321 Cr.PC for withdrawal of case. It is further pleaded that alternate remedy is available to Smt. Sheetal and prayer for dismissal of of petition sought.
3. Per contra Smt. Sheetal wife of Sh. Mahesh Thakur personally appeared rt before Court and submitted that matter compromised inter se parties out of Court and she is residing with her has been husband co-accused as of today and she has no objection if petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC is allowed.
4. Court heard learned Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioners and learned Additional Advocate General appearing on behalf of non-petitioner No.1 and Court also perused the entire records carefully.
5. Following points arise for determination in the present petition:
1) Whether petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC is liable to be accepted as mentioned in memorandum of grounds of petition?
2) Final order.
Findings upon point No.1 with reasons:
6. It is proved on record that FIR No.176/2015 dated 14.05.2015 was filed by complainant namely Sheetal under Sections 498-A and ::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:24:12 :::HCHP 3 323 read with Section 34 IPC. It is also proved on record that investigation was completed and report of investigation under Section 173 Cr.PC was filed before competent Court of law. It is also proved .
on record that out of Court settlement executed inter se parties and complainant namely Sheetal is residing with her husband co-accused Mahesh Thakur as of today. It is well settled law that criminal offences which are against the society should not be allowed to be compounded of by the Court. It is well settled law that following criminal offences should not be compounded while exercising inherent powers under rt Section 482 Cr.PC. (i) Murder (ii) Rape (iii) Dacoity (iv) Prevention of Corruption Act (v) Criminal Offence under Section 307 IPC. It is well settled law that criminal offences relating to (i) Commercial transaction
(ii) Matrimonial dispute and family dispute should be allowed to be compounded while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.PC. See 2014(4) SC 573 Judgment Today title Narinder Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another. Present criminal proceedings are initiated against accused persons relating to matrimonial dispute. In view of the fact that complainant namely Sheetal is residing alongwith her husband co-accused Mahesh Thakur as of today Court is of the opinion that it is expedient in the ends of justice to allow the petition. In view of above stated facts out of Court settlement executed inter se parties is accepted by the Court. Point No.1 is answered in affirmative.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:24:12 :::HCHP 4Point No.2 (Final Order).
7. In view of findings upon point No.1 above present petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 is allowed .
and out of Court settlement executed inter se parties is accepted by the Court and proceedings of Criminal Case No.76-2 of 2015 title State of H.P. vs. Mahesh and others are quashed against accused persons in the ends of justice. Statement(s) of Sh. Mahesh Thakur and Smt. of Sheetal recorded on 07.04.2016 will form part and parcel of the order.
Accused persons are discharged forthwith. File of learned Trial Court rt alongwith certified copy of the order be sent back forthwith. Cr.MMO No. 90/2016 is disposed of. Pending application(s) if any also disposed of.
May 20, 2016 (P. S. Rana),
(rana) Judge.
::: Downloaded on - 15/04/2017 20:24:12 :::HCHP