Madhya Pradesh High Court
Rajesh Pathak & Ors vs The State Of M.P. on 18 August, 2023
Author: Anuradha Shukla
Bench: Anuradha Shukla
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE ANURADHA SHUKLA
ON THE 18th OF AUGUST, 2023
CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 2664 of 1997
BETWEEN:-
1. RAJESH PATHAK S/O
GURUDAYAL PATHAK, AGED 35
YEARS, R/O THANA SHAHPURA,
DISTRICT JABALPUR (M. P.)
2. BABLU ALIAS MAHENDRA S/O
BILLU KEWAT, AGED ABOUT 20
YEARS, R/O SAHAPURA,
JABALPUR (M.P.)
.....APPELLANT
(BY MS. SANGEETA NAIDU - ADVOCATE - ABSENT )
AND
THE STATE OF M.P.
.....RESPONDENT
(BY SHRI ATMARAM BEN - DEPUTY GOVT. ADVOCATE )
Reserved on : 09.08.2023
Pronounced on : 18.08.2023
This appeal coming on for hearing this day, the court passed the
following:
ORDER
This criminal appeal has been filed by the appellants to challenge their conviction and sentence passed on 09.12.1997 in Special Case No.23/1997 by Special Judge (under Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes) Prevention of Atrocities Act (hereinafter referred as 'SC/ST Act'), whereby the appellants were convicted under Section 3(1)(iii) of the SC/ST Act and were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 9 months with fine amount of Rs.500/- each and in default of fine additional rigorous imprisonment for three months.
2. This appeal was taken up for hearing on 14th June, 2023 but none of the appellants appeared before the Court hence, it was ordered that bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.20,000/- each be issued against the appellants to secure their presence on 26th July 2023. When the matter was again taken up on 26.07.2023, it was informed to the Court by the SHO, Police Station Shahpura that appellant No.1 has died during pendency of appeal. As no one appeared on his behalf to prosecute this appeal, therefore, it was ordered that the appeal is abated so far as it relates to appellant No.1. On 26th July 2023 itself two interim applications were pending consideration, which are I.A. No.17769/2023 and I.A. No.17770/2023. In these applications, a prayer for compromise was made hence, the parties were directed to remain present before the Registrar (J-II) for verification of compromise.
3. It is claimed in the said interlocutory applications that a dispute suddenly arose between the parties on the matter of purchasing clothes and on that account the matter was reported to the police, which wrongly registered it under the provisions of SC/ST Act. It is further claimed by both the parties that they have now settled their dispute and do not want to continue this matter to linger on. It is prayed that the appellant herein may be acquitted in the light of compromise arrived at between the parties and his sentence be set aside. Registrar (J-II) has given his report dated 3rd of August, 2023 regarding verification of compromise application, in which it is mentioned that a compromise has been reached between the parties and victim Kamal Singh has expressed that he has voluntarily entered into a compromise with appellant No.2, Bablu @ Mahendra S/o Billu Kewat. Though a compromise on behalf of Dashrath has also been recorded, but looking to the facts of prosecution case, it appears that he was neither the complainant nor the victim in the case. From the report dated 3th of August 2023, the compromise appears to be free from any threat, inducement or pressure and is voluntarily entered into by the parties with their free-will and volition.
4. Appellant No.2 Bablu @ Mahindra Kewat was convicted for the offence under Section 3(1)(iii) of SC/ST Act, which is non- compoundable in nature. In Cr.A.No.1489 of 2012 (Ramgopal vs. State of Madhya Pradesh), the Supreme Court of India has held that the cases which are non-compoundable cannot be compounded by a criminal Court in purported exercise of its powers under Section 320 Cr.P.C. Any such attempt by the Court would amount to alteration, addition and modification of Section 320 Cr.P.C, which is the exclusive domain of Legislature. There is no patent or latent ambiguity in the language of Section 320 Cr.P.C., which may justify its wider interpretation and include such offences in the docket of 'compoundable' offences which have been consciously kept out as non-compoundable. Nevertheless, the limited jurisdiction to compound an offence within the framework of Section 320 of Cr.P.C. is not an embargo against invoking inherent powers by the High Court vested in it under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The High Court, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case and for justifiable reasons, can press Section 482 Cr.P.C. in aid to prevent abuse of the process of any Court and/or to secure the ends of justice.
5. A three Judges' Bench of Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan & Ors. (2019)5 SCC 688 has held as under:-
"(1) The power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section 320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;
(2) Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions, which involved 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;
(3) Similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes 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."
(4) xxx xxx xxx (5) xxxxxxxxx
6. In the light of legal prepositions as manifested in the aforesaid judgment, this Court is of the view that though the offence of Section 3 (1)(iii) of SC/ST Act is not compoundable under law, but the circumstances of present case reveal that the alleged offence had its genesis in a money dispute and it happened suddenly without any premeditation. It was not a crime of such a nature, as would affect the society at large. Its nature was basically private originating from some money falling due for payment by the complainant to the appellant. Both the sides have now settled their dispute. In the circumstances, it appears to be a fit case to exercise the power of Section 482 Cr.P.C. because letting the dispute to brood over, there are chances that relationship between the parties is disrupted again. In view of legal and factual circumstances of the case, the appeal is allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside. Consequently, appellant no.2 is acquitted of the charge of Section 3(1)(iii) of SC/ST Act. He is presently on bail, his bail bonds stand discharged. The fine amount, if any, deposited by him be refunded to him.
7. A copy of this order be sent to the concerned trial Court for information and necessary compliance.
(ANURADHA SHUKLA) JUDGE rv Digitally signed by NITESH PANDEY Date: 2023.08.22 18:45:22 +05'30' Adobe Reader version: 11.0.8