The Single Judge dismissed an application under S. 482 CrPC filed to quash a charge sheet and related proceedings involving serious offences under IPC. Although a settlement was reached, the court held that the serious nature of the offences and the State's objection prevented quashing, leaving the matter for trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15707 of 2021
Applicant :- Prabhu Pasi And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Diwakar Prasad Tiwari
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Ajay Pandey learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri Diwakar Prasad Tiwari learned counsel for opposite party No. 2.
Present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 17.2.1998 and the proceedings of S.T. No. 210 of 2010 arising out of Case Crime No. 259 of 1997 under Sections 323, 324, 326, 308, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Manjhanpur, District Kaushambi pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 2 Kaushambi.
Counsel for the private parties would contend that there was no real occurrence. Only a civil dispute existed between the parties. Exaggerated allegations were made in the heat of the moment. With passage of time parties have been able to resolve their dispute and differences such that the opposite party No.2 does not wish to press the prosecution any further. Reference has been made to the written compromise reached between the parties. It is stated to have been verified by the court below.
On the other hand, learned AGA would submit, offence alleged are serious being offence under Sections 324, 326 and 308 IPC. Prima facie injury report and case diary material support the occurrence including injury. Therefore, he would submit, the offences are non compoundable and it may not be possible to reach the conclusion that the dispute was purely civil. Once the occurrence is escalated beyond the level as may constitute the
ingredients of serious offence, the Court may not allow for such private settlement to arise.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, though it is not in doubt that the parties appear to have reached an arrangement wherein the opposite party No. 2 is no longer inclined to press the criminal prosecution against the applicants. At the same time, keeping in mind the facts noted above especially the objection being raised by the State, it is not possible to quash the prosecution. How the parties may conduct themselves at the trial is not for the Court to speculate. Leaving all such courses open to the parties, the relief claimed is declined. Neither it is possible to accept the compromise nor it is possible to quash the prosecution.
Accordingly, the instant application is dismissed with the observations made above.
Order Date :- 9.1.2023 Faraz
Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the application under S. 482 CrPC to quash the charge sheet and prosecution proceedings can be granted given the serious nature of the offences and the State's objection to the private settlem
Whether a civil dispute between parties can be automatically converted into a quashed criminal proceeding when the offence involves serious injury and is non-compoundable.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Prabhu Pasi And 3 Others
State of U.P.
Another
Saumitra Dayal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
