Allahabad High Court
Wasim And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 31 October, 2023
Author: Dinesh Pathak
Bench: Dinesh Pathak
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:208235 Court No. - 90 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40047 of 2023 Applicant :- Wasim And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Singh Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.
1. Sri Santosh Kumar Singh learned Advocate has filed memo of appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.
2. Office is directed to print the name of Sri Santosh Singh as counsel for the opposite party no.2.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
4. The present applicants have invoked the inherent power of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. beseeching the quashing of impugned cognizance and summoning order dated 29.08.2023 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.4293 of 2023 (State vs. Wasim and others), arising out of Case Crime No.189 of 2023, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Najibabad, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Najibabad, District Bijnor, on the basis of compromise.
5. Opposite party no.2 has lodged an F.I.R., being Case Crime No.0189 of 2023, levelling allegation of harassment and cruelty for demand of dowry. During the pendency of the proceeding, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and inked compromise. Having considered the amicable settlement between the parties, co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed order dated 18.09.2023 in Application U/S. 482 No.34605 of 2023, issuing a direction to the court concerned to verify the compromise and liberty was granted to the present applicants to approach before this Court again in case no action is taken on the compromise application. For ready reference order dated 18.09.2023 passed by this Court is quoted hereinbelow:-
"1. Vakalatnama as well as counter affidavit filed today in the Court by Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2. The same is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the cognizance order dated 29.8.2023 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.4293 of 2023 (State vs. Wasim and others) arising out of Case Crime No.189 of 2023 under Sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Najibabad, District Bijnor on the basis of compromise dated 19.4.2023.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that earlier the applicants have approached this Court in Criminal Misc. Writ Petition No. 6718 of 2023, which was disposed of vide order dated 1.5.2023 directing the Investigation Officer, to examine the compromise. But wholly illegally the summoning order was issued on 29.8.2023. The compromise have entered between them which has been reduced in writing is annexed as Annexure No.(2) to the present application.
5. Sri Santosh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the aforesaid submission made by learned counsel for the applicants.
6. Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below and file a certified copy of this order within three weeks, along with the original copy of the compromise dated 19.4.2023. It is, therefore, expected that the court below may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order to that effect within next six weeks.
7. In view of the above, the present application is disposed of.
8. For a period of three months or till the final order passed on the compromise application by the court below whichever is earlier, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants.
9. In case, the applicants are still aggrieved or if no action is taken, it will be open for the applicants to approach this Court afresh."
6. In pursuance of the order dated 18.09.2023 passed by this Court, learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Najibabad, District Bijnor, has passed the verification order dated 05.10.2023. Certified copy of the order dated 05.10.2023 and certified copy of compromise application as well as miscellaneous application are collectively filed as Annexure No.7 to the affidavit filed in support of instant application.
7. Perusal of order dated 05.10.2023 reveals that in pursuance of the order dated 18.09.2023 passed by this Court, first informant and all the accused persons were appeared before the court below. Signature of the parties over the compromise application (Paper No.A-15) has been identified by their respective counsels. Terms and conditions of the compromise has been spelt out to the parties, who have admitted the factum of compromise. Accordingly, compromise has been verified.
8. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the eventuality of the amicable settlement took place between the parties and the verification of the compromise vide order dated 05.10.2023 passed by the court competent, instant application may be allowed and criminal proceeding initiated against the present applicants may be quashed.
9. In view of the above, learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties have buried the hatchet and there is no grudges between them against each other, who are living peacefully. It is further submitted that to observe the peace and tranquility in the life of both the parties, instant matter is required to be decided finally in the light of the settlement. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court :-
(i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675.
(ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667.
(iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1.
(iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.
(v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.
10. In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below:-
"15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court;
(ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable.
(iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power;
(iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court;
(v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated;
(vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences;
(vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned;
(viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute;
(ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding w19.10.2022ould cause oppression and prejudice; and
(x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."
11. Learned AGA has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise application and compromise verification order dated 05.10.2023 took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the court concerned.
12. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has nodded the factum of the compromise entered into between the parties and he has no objection, if the instant application is decided finally on the basis of the said compromise. He also submits that compromise application and compromise verification order dated 05.10.2023 took place between both the parties, who have voluntarily entered into compromise and opposite party no. 2 does not wants to prosecute the present case against the applicants any more as no dispute remains between the parties.
13. Having considered the compromise application and compromise verification order dated 05.10.2023 took place between the parties and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.
14. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the compromise application and compromise verification order dated 05.10.2023 arrived at between the parties, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case, so far as it relates to the present applicants, is hereby quashed.
15. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.
Order Date :- 31.10.2023 Jitendra