Allahabad High Court
Kalloo @ Alok And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 March, 2023
Author: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38421 of 2022 Applicant :- Kalloo @ Alok And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashutosh Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rahul Dwivedi Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of S.S.T. No. 126 of 2018 (State Vs Kallu @ Alok), arising out of Case Crime No. 168 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506,332,353 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal.
The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably.
Pursuant to the order dated 28.07.2022 passed in Application U/s 482 No. 22293 of 2022, parties appeared before the court below and the court below vide order dated 05.08.2022 verified the compromise deed filed by the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably.
In the present case, the sections involved are Sections 323, 504, 506,332,353 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act.
In compliance of the aforesaid order, the court below has verified the contents and parties of the compromise deed to the extent that the parties and contents of the compromise deed are genuine and they have entered into the compromise by free-will.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal case.
Per contra, learned AGA although opposed the prayer by submitting that present matter relates to the provisions of SC/ST Act and being special act, proceedings merely on the basis of compromise should not be quashed but he could not dispute the fact that the dispute between the parties appears to be private in nature and both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compromise was also duly verified by the court below pursuant to the order passed by this Court.
I have heard both the parties and perused the record of the case.
In the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another (2012) 10 SCC 303, wherein the Apex Court has referred to a number of matters for the proposition that even a non-compoundable offence can also be quashed on the ground of a settlement agreement between the offender and the victim. The view expressed in the said judgement has been affirmed by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 6 SCC 466.
The three Judge Bench of the Apex Court in in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in [AIR 2019 SC 1290] discussed and considered the power of this Court in respect of quashing of non compoundable offences on the basis of the compromise executed between the parties.
Further, the three judges Bench of the Apex Court in case of Ramawatar Vs. State of M.P. AIR 2021 SC 5228 observed as:-
"15. Ordinarily, when dealing with offences arising out of special statutes such as the SC/ST Act, the Court will be extremely circumspect in its approach. The SC/ST Act has been specifically enacted to deter acts of indignity, humiliation and harassment against members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The Act is also a recognition of the depressing reality that despite undertaking several measures, the Scheduled Castes/Scheduled Tribes continue to be subjected to various atrocities at the hands of upper-castes. The Courts have to be mindful of the fact that the Act has been enacted keeping in view the express constitutional safeguards enumerated in Articles 15, 17 and 21 of the Constitution, with a twin-fold objective of protecting the members of these vulnerable communities as well as to provide relief and rehabilitation to the victims of caste-based atrocities.
16. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a 'special statute' would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C."
In view of the above, if the Court feels that continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in this case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is restored, it can order for quashing of the FIR or criminal proceedings as it is the duty of the Court to prevent continuation of unnecessary judicial process.
Therefore, in view of the above and considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. 2014 6 SCC 466; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others reported in [AIR 2019 SC 1290], Ramawatar Vs. State of M.P. AIR 2021 SC 5228, Ram Gopal, and another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh with Krishnappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka, reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 834 as also considering the settlement arrived at between the parties, I am of the considered opinion that this matter deserves to be given a quietus as continuance of proceedings arising out of the FIR in question would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 126 of 2018 (State Vs Kallu @ Alok), arising out of Case Crime No. 168 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506,332,353 IPC and Section 3(1)Da, Dha SC/ST Act, P.S. Rajpura, District Sambhal are hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 24.3.2023 RavindraKSingh