Allahabad High Court
Pappu Khan @ Mohd. Azam Khan And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. ... on 14 May, 2024
Author: Shamim Ahmed
Bench: Shamim Ahmed
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36815 Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4105 of 2024 Applicant :- Pappu Khan @ Mohd. Azam Khan And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Qazi Mohd.Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Ghufran Khan Hon'ble Shamim Ahmed,J.
Heard Shri Qazi Mohd.Ahmad, learned counsel for applicants, Shri Mohd. Ghufran Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned A.G.A.-I, for the State as well as perused the record.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed a short counter affidavit today in the Court, which is taken on record. Learned counsel for the applicants has also filed a rejoinder affidavit today in the Court, which is also taken on record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.911 of 2022, Crime No.312/2021, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Utraula, District Balrampur as well as to quash the summoning order dated 15.04.2022 and charge sheet dated 23.11.2021 on the basis of compromise dated 07.03.2024 and verification report dated 04.04.2024.
A co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 20.03.2024 has passed the following order in Application Under Section 482 No.2582 of 2024:
"1. Heard Sri Qazi Mohd. Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned AGA-I for the State and Mohd. Ghufran Khan, learned Advocate, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2. Said Vakalatnama is taken on record.
2. By means of this petition filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed the following main relief:-
"WHEREFORE, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceeding in Criminal Case no. 911/2022 Crime no. 312/2021 U/s 147/148/323/504 IPC Police Station Utraula, District Balrampur styled as State...Vs.... Ayyub Khan and others as well as impugned summoning order dated 15.4.2022 and charge sheet dated 23.11.2021 as contained in Annexure no. 1 and 2 to this petition, against the petitioners only."
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has stated that two accused persons, who are petitioners, have compromised with the complainant as the original copy of the compromise deed has been enclosed as Annexure No.4 with this petition, therefore, he has requested that the criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise.
4. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also stated that the complainant has compromised the issue with the aforesaid two petitioners.
5. On being asked as to what about other accused persons, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has informed that the complainant does not want to settle the dispute through compromise qua other co-accused persons.
6. On that, Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned AGA, has stated that if the proceedings against the present petitioners are quashed on the basis of compromise, it may create some practical difficulty with the trial court while proceeding further against other co-accused persons inasmuch as even if finding some relevant material against these petitioners at the stage of Section 319 Cr.P.C., the learned trial court would be helpless to summon these persons. Therefore, as per Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, the proceedings of any criminal case may not be quashed in part.
7. On that, learned counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon the judgment and order dated 21.12.2023 passed by this Court in three cases, leading petition bearing Application U/S 482 No.5525 of 2023, Khursheed and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, referring all relevant judgments of the Apex Court as well as this Court observed in para-10 of the judgment that the FIR/ charge sheet/ criminal proceedings can be quashed in part; for the convenience, para-10 of the aforesaid judgment is being reproduced herein below:-
"10. From the reports referred above it is apparent that an FIR/charge-sheet/criminal proceedings can be quashed in part. In other words, "the FIR/charge-sheet/criminal proceedings can be quashed qua the accused-applicant in exercise of power under Section 482 CrPC. However, this power can be exercised if the case of the said accused-applicant falls within the proposition settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments referred above. Questions framed above are answered accordingly."
8. Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh has further submitted that though this Court in the case of Khursheed (supra) has permitted the quashing of criminal proceedings in part but the situation, which has been placed by him, has not been dealt in the aforesaid judgment. At this stage, the prayer of the petitioners is that the contents of the aforesaid compromise agreement and parties thereof may be verified by the competent court concerned and verification report may be filed.
9. Considering the aforesaid request of the learned counsel for the parties and Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, learned AGA, I find it appropriate that to direct the court below to verify the contents and parties of the compromise deed.
10. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/J.M., Utraula, Balrampur that if any such compromise is filed before the court below concerned, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. For the purpose of verification of the compromise, petitioners and opposite party no.2 shall appear before the court concerned on 04.04.2024 alongwith original compromise deed and the learned court below shall proceed to verify the compromise deed. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court concerned and the same shall be sent to this Court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the petitioners to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
11. It is expected that needful exercise shall be carried out by the respective parties expeditiously.
12. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the petitioners pursuant to the aforesaid case.
13. However, the proposition/ legal eventuality, which has been placed by Sri Aniruddh Kumar Singh, may be considered by this Court at the time of quashing the proceedings against the petitioners on the basis of compromise.
14. Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the petitioners within four working days, as per High Court Rules. "
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in compliance of the order passed by this Court, the applicants filed compromise deed before the learned trial court and the concerned court vide its order dated 04.04.2024 verified the said compromise in the presence of the applicants and opposite party no.2, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.7 to the affidavit filed in support of application.
On perusal of documents placed before this Court, it reveals that there are total 12 accused in this case but the compromise has been signed by only two accused, however, in view of the judgment pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors. Vs. State of Gujarat & Anr,; reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641, all the parties have to sign the compromise if they entered into compromise. Accordingly, prayer for quashing of the entire proceedings in pursuance of the present compromise is refused. Even the verification order dated 04.04.2024 passed by the learned trial court is also bad in the eyes of law as the same has been passed without considering the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors. (Supra), as such, the same is liable to be quashed and is accordingly hereby quashed.
On further perusal of documents, it further reveals that there is discrepancy in the signatures made by the opposite party no.2 in the vakalatnama as well as in the compromise. Although this Court is not a handwriting expert yet prima facie it appears that both the signatures do not match with each other.
In view of above, the matter is being remanded back to the concerned trial court for re-verification of the compromise and if all the parties have not signed the compromise, the same may be rejected in view of the judgment rendered by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors. (Supra). The learned trial court is also directed to proceed in accordance with law with the trial.
With the aforesaid observations, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the learned trial court concerned immediately.
Order Date :- 14.5.2024/Saurabh