Telangana High Court
Eluga Pavan Kumar vs The State Of Telangana on 7 January, 2022
Author: K. Lakshman
Bench: K.Lakshman
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.LAKSHMAN
I.A.NOs.3 AND 4 OF 2021
IN/AND
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7084 of 2021
ORDER:
This Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'the Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1312 of 2020 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Karimnagar relating to Cr.No.177 of 2020 on the file of Karimnagar Rural Police Station initially registered for the offence under Section 307 read with 34 of IPC and later altered to Section 326 read with 34 IPC, against the petitioners herein.
2. Heard Sri V.Srikantha Rao, learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Public Prosecutor for the 1st respondent and Sri Venuganti Mahesh Kumar, learned counsel for the 2nd respondent. Perused the record.
3. The allegation against the petitioners is that the 2nd respondent has owned agricultural land in Sy.No.116 situated at outskirts of Theegalaguttapally, Karimnagar and abutting to his land, the land of the 1st petitioner is situated and there are disputes between them with regard to the said land. While so, on 12.07.2020, all the accused/petitioners herein along with 20 others assaulted the 2nd respondent, with knives, sickles, stones and sticks and beat him indiscriminately with an intention to kill him and caused bleeding injuries over eye, mouth and chest which are grievous in nature.
2
4. During pendency of the present Criminal Petition, the parties have compromised the matter and, accordingly, respondent No.2-de facto complainant filed I.A.Nos.3 and 4 of 2021 to permit him to compound the offence and to compromise the case in C.C.No.1312 of 2020 pending on the file the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Karimnagar and thereby quash the proceedings in the said case against the petitioners herein.
5. Vide order dated 07.12.2021, this Court, after recording the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as respondent No.2, directed the parties to appear before the Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad, on or before 17.12.2021 for their identification and also directed the Secretary to submit a report by 17.12.2021. In compliance with the said order dated 07.12.2021, the Secretary has submitted his report dated 15.12.2021.
6. The Secretary, Telangana High Court Legal Services Committee, Hyderabad submitted his report dated 15.12.2021 stating that the identification of the parties has been established. In the joint memo, it is stated that on the complaint of the 2nd respondent, the Police Karimnagar Rural Police Station, registered a case in Cr.No.177 of 2020 for the offence under Section 307 read with 34 of IPC initially and later altered to section to 326 read with 34 of IPC. It is further stated that with the intervention of elders, both the parties have 3 compromised the matter amicably between them and the 2nd respondent has no objection to quash the proceedings in C.C.No.1312 of 2020 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Karimnagar.
7. Referring to the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan1, and in Ramgopal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh2, learned counsel for the petitioners would submits that though the offence alleged against the petitioners is against the society, considering the fact that 2nd respondent had received grievous injuries, the same can be quashed by recording the compromise entered between the parties .
8. With regard to exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences under Section 320 of Cr.P.C. Hon'ble Apex Court in Ramgopal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh3, held as follows:-
"We thus sum-up and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Code of Criminal Procedure where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences 'compoundable' within the statutory framework, the extra ordinary power enjoined upon a High Court Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure or vested in this Court Under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Code of Criminal Procedure Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of 1 (2019) 5 SCC 403 2 MANU/SC/0728/2021 3 MANU/SC/0728/2021 4 quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the Accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the Accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations.''
9. In State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan4, at paragraph No.13, the Hon'ble Apex Court, has laid down five parameters which are as follows:-
i) that 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;
ii) 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;
iii) similarly, such power is not to be exercised for the offences under the special statutes like 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;
iv) offences Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and the Arms Act etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code and/or the Arms Act etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers Under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 Indian Penal Code in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 4 (2019) 5 SCC 403 5 Indian Penal Code is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delegate parts of the body, nature of weapons used etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge sheet/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paragraphs 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in the case of Narinder Singh (supra) should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;
v) while exercising the power Under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are private in nature and do not have a serious impact on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the Accused; the conduct of the Accused, namely, whether the Accused was absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.
10. One of the parameters stated above is that 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 anfd have a serious impact on society. It also further held that while exercising power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in respect of non- compoundable offences, which are private in nature and did not have a serious impact on society, on ground that there was a settlement/compromise between victim and offender, High Court is required to consider the antecedents of accused; conduct of accused, namely, whether accused was absconding and why he 6 was absconding, how he had managed with complainant to enter into a compromise etc.
11. In the charge sheet, there is specific allegation about receipt of grievous injury by the victim. There is alteration of Section of law from Section 307 of IPC to 326 of IPC. They have now arrived at an understanding and compromised the mater. Therefore, the 2nd respondent-defacto-complainant is not interested in pursuing the present Calendar Case. They have filed joint memo of compromise accordingly.
12. Considering the above said facts and also the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Laxmi Narayan and also Ramgopal (supra) and that there is no evidence to show that the petitioners have involved in any other criminal case and the antecedents of the petitioners in the charge sheet.
13. In view the said facts, this is a fit case to exercise the power of this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, I.A. Nos.3 and 4 of 2021 are allowed. Consequently, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.1312 of 2020 on the file of the II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Karimnagar, are hereby quashed against the petitioners/A.1, 2, A.4 to A.6. Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.
___________________ K. LAKSHMAN, J Date:07.01.2022 vvr