Madhya Pradesh High Court
Zakir Hussain vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 26 November, 2014
Misc. Criminal Case No.1842/2014
26.11.2014:
Shri Sujat Ali, Advocate for the applicant.
Shri Y.D. Yadav, Panel Lawyer for the respondent
State.
Heard.
This application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is preferred by the applicant for quashing the the FIR registered under Crime No.434/2012 registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Katni, for the offence punishable under Section 506 and 507 of IPC.
The brief facts of the case are that on 08.02.2012 friend of complainant namely Deepak Tiwari was killed by the accused in front of Swami Bhojnalaya, Bus Stand, Katni. The complainant is a witness in this case and his evidence is fixed on 25.06.2012. On 17.06.2012 at about 05:15 pm in the evening the applicant came to the house of complainant and compelled him to go to Jabalpur. The fatherinlaw of accused Ravi Rajak, Moin and Munna came from Jabalpur, who threatened him not to give evidence against the accused Ravi Rajak and other accused otherwise he would be killed. He was also threatened from the mobile no.9300106942. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that no alleged offence is made out against the applicant prima facie because the same is not supported by any cogent evidence. The complainant and applicant are the witnesses in a murder case in which the complainant is compelling not to support the prosecution evidence. It is further submitted that the complainant Abdul Javed and applicant Zakir Hussain, after appearing before the trial Court had filed the application for compromise but the learned trial Court vide order dated 19.10.2013 rejected the application filed under Order 320 (2) of Cr.P.C. on the ground that offence punishable under Section 507 of IPC is not compoundable.
This fact does not to repeat that after filing the compromise complainant Abdul Javed will not said any thing against the present applicant Zakir Hussain during his statement, hence, conviction of applicant is totally bleak. In such premises continuation of the criminal case, pending before the trial Court will be amount of misuse of time and powers of the Court.
Learned Panel Lawyer appearing for the respondent/State has not opposed the submissions made by the counsel for the applicant regarding compromise.
It has been ruled by the Apex Court in Shiji @ Pappu and others vs. Radhika and Anr. 2012 Cr.L.R.(SC) 69 that where there is no chance of recording conviction against the accused persons and the entire exercise of trial is destined to be exercise of futility, the criminal case registered against the accused persons though it may not be compoundable can be quashed by the High Court in exercise of powers under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
In view of the foregoing and having regard to the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties and in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in Shiji @ Pappu and others vs. Radhika and Anr. (supra), the FIR lodged against the petitioner under Sections 506 and 507 of IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Katni is ordered to be quashed.
Both the parties are permitted to compound the offence under Section 507 of IPC.
In the result the FIR lodged against the petitioner under Sections 506 and 507 of IPC registered at Police Station Kotwali, District Katni is hereby set aside.
Applicant is acquitted of the aforesaid charges. The petition is allowed accordingly.
(Subhash Kakade) Judge taj.