Allowed

Sushil Giri and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Aug 2023A482/20330/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

On an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings arising from a violence case due to a court-verified compromise, the High Court quashed the charge sheet and criminal proceedings, relying on Supreme Court guidelines regarding settlements in private disputes.

What did the court decide?

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No.1242 of 2023 are quashed.

Sushil Giri and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Bail and Remand | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:166939

¶2

Court No. - 90

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20330 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sushil Giri And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ashraf Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶7

None is present for the opposite party No.2.

¶8

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed beseeching quashing of charge sheet No.400 of 2022 dated 06.11.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1242 of 2023 (State Vs. Sushil Giri and others), arising out of Case Crime No.96 of 2022, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 324, 323, 352, 506, 325 IPC, Police Station Bhamoura, District Bareilly, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Vth, Bareilly.

¶9

While entertaining the instant application, following order dated 13.06.2023 has been passed:-

¶10

"Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submits that the parties have settled their dispute by way of compromise dated 29.7.2022 but the said compromise has not been verified by the court concerned.

¶11

Let the said compromise dated 29.7.2022 be verified by the court concerned for which parties will approach the concerned court on 28.6.2023.

¶12

Put up this case as fresh on 2.8.2023 along with supplementary affidavit annexing thereto a certified copy of the aforesaid verified compromise dated 29.7.2022. "

¶13

In pursuance of the order dated 13.06.2023, learned counsel for the applicants has filed supplementary affidavit, which is taken on record. Along with supplementary affidavit, applicants have annexed the compromise verification order dated 28.06.2023. Perusal of the order dated 28.06.2023 reveals that both the parties were appeared before the court below, who have been identified by their respective counsel. The terms and conditions of the

¶14

compromise has been spelled out to the parties, who have admitted the factum of the compromise and, accordingly, compromise has been verified.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that, in view of the compromise took place between the parties and the verification order passed by the learned trial court verifying the compromise took place between the parties, the instant application may be allowed and the criminal proceedings initiated against the present applicants may be quashed. It is further submitted that in the case of Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466, criminal cases, even under Section 307 IPC, are held liable to be quashed on the basis of compromise. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicants has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court :-

¶16

(i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675.

¶17

(ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667.

¶18

(iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1.

¶19

(iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶20

In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below:-

¶21

"15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court;

¶22

(ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement

¶23

has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable.

¶24

(iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power;

¶25

(iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court;

¶26

(v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated;

¶27

(vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences;

¶28

(vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned;

¶29

(viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute;

¶30

(ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and

¶31

(x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic wellbeing of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

¶32

Learned A.G.A. has no objection in deciding the instant matter on the basis of the compromise which has been duly verified by the court concerned, vide order dated 28.06.2023.

¶33

Having considered the submissions as advanced by learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned A.G.A. and the verification order dated 28.06.2023 and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceedings would cause oppression and prejudice.

¶34

In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been duly verified by the concerned court below, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed and the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶35

Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action.

¶36

Order Date :- 18.8.2023 Mini

¶37

Digitally signed by :- MINI KANAUJIYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sushil Giri and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushil Giri and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sufian Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sant Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanchit Alias Anshul Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indraj and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munna Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shyam Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another