Allahabad High Court
Munsaf Ali vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 May, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:99900 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11888 of 2023 Applicant :- Munsaf Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Laloo Yadav,Kiran Rani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Balwant Kumar Singh Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
1. List revised.
2. Heard Sri Laxmi Shankar Yadav, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Laloo Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Balwant Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 who has filed a short counter affidavit today in Court which is taken on record, Sri Sanjay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the record.
3. The present Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Munsaf Ali, with the prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet dated 22.6.2022 in Case Crime No. 182 of 2022, under Section 376 (B) I.P.C., P.S.- Amroha Nagar, District Amroha (J.P.Nagar), pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar (Amroha) in view of compromise dated 15.3.2023 (Annexure No. 5 to this affidavit) and the entire criminal proceedings of Case Crime No. 182 of 2022, under Section 376 (B) I.P.C., P.S.- Amroha Nagar, District Amroha (J.P.Nagar), pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar (Amroha) with the further prayer to stay the further proceedings of said case.
4. As per office report dated 8.5.2023 a report from concerned C.J.M. has been received in which it has been reported that compromise dated 15.3.2023 has been verified vide its report dated 18.4.2023.
5. The facts of the case are that a First Information Report was lodged on 20.4.2022 as Case Crime No. 182 of 2022, under Section 376 I.P.C., against the applicant Munsaf Ali (the applicant), Mustafa Ali, Mohd. Noor. The matter was investigated and a charge sheet No. 219 of 2022, under the said section was filed against them as there are allegations against them.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that during pendency of the trial the parties have entered into compromise and the opposite party no. 2 filed a compromise affidavit out of his own sweet will before the trial court on 15.3.2023, copy of the said affidavit has been placed before the Court which is annexure no. 4 to the affidavit. It is argued that the in compliance of the order of this Court dated 6.4.2023 the said compromise has been verified by the concerned court vide order dated 18.4.2023, which is on record. It is argued that both the parties have entered into compromise out of their own sweet will and the opposite party no. 2 has settled the dispute with the applicants and has stated in the said compromise that there is no grievance left so he does not want to pursue the matter and as such the proceedings be quashed on the basis of compromise. Annexure no. 4 being the application and the alleged compromise affidavit has been placed before the Court to buttress the said arguments. It is argued that as such the impugned proceedings against the applicant be quashed.
7. Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the prayer for quashing. It is argued that the proceedings in the matter are of offences which are not compoundable. Learned State counsel has placed before the Court the judgement dated 29.3.2023 passed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 2941 of 2023: Pravin Kumar Singh@Pravin Kumar and 2 others vs. State of U.P. and another, in which the said issue was taken up and the Court has held that since the case is under Section 376 I.P.C. read with Sections 3/4 POCSO Act are non-compoundable hence compounding on the basis of compromise entered into between the accused and the complainant is not legally permissible and has thus dismissed the same. Identically other co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 8514 of 2023 (Om Prakash vs. State of U.P. and another) has also held that the criminal proceedings under Section 376 I.P.C. and POCSO Act cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the accused and the victim. Further this Court in Criminal Misc. Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 7087 of 2023 (Akash Maurya vs. State of U.P. and 4 others) decided on 18.4.2023, while relying upon the various judgements of the Apex Court and this Court also has held that the cases pertains to sexual offence cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.
8. After having heard learned counsel for the applicants and perusing the records, it is evident that the applicant is accused in Case Crime No. 182 of 2022, under Section 376 (B) I.P.C., quashing of the proceedings is being prayed on the basis of compromise said to have been entered into between the first informant and the applicant who is accused. As per the judgement dated 29.3.2023 rendered in the case of Pravin Kumar Singh@Pravin Kumar and 2 others (Supra), the Court has reiterated the law that quashing of proceedings of a case on the basis of compromise in non-compoundable offence is not legally permissible. Identically in the case of Om Prakash (Supra) and Akash Maurya (Supra) it has been held that the case pertains to sexual offence cannot be quashed on the basis of compromise.
9. Looking to the law on the subject and the facts of the case this Court does not find it to be a fit case for quashing of the proceeding on the basis of compromise and as such the present application is dismissed.
10. Interim order, if any, stands vacated.
11. Office is directed to communicate this order to concerned trial court within two weeks.
(Samit Gopal,J.) Order Date :- 9.5.2023 {Naresh}