The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 324, 308, 323, and 504, arising from a private dispute, after the parties reached a compromise. The Court held that continuing prosecution was futile and oppressive.
Criminal proceedings of case no. 3373 of 2022 against the applicants are hereby quashed.
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.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:217671
Court No. - 88
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26391 of 2023
Applicant :- Krishna Kant Tiwari And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Prakash Vishwakarma
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
1-Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
2-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Case No. 3373 of 2022 (State vs. Krishna Kant Tiwari & others) arising out of case crime no. 399 of 2021, under Sections 324, 308, 323, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Kannauj, District Kannauj pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj.
3-It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the opposite party no. 2 lodged a first information report on 11.06.2021 against the applicants for the offence under Sections 324, 323 and 504 I.P.C., in which after culmination of investigation, charge-sheet dated 04.08.2021 was submitted, on which the concerned court below took cognizance and summoned the applicants. Thereafter, the parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court and a compromise application dated 02.11.2022 was moved before concerned court below which was directed to be verified by this Court vide order dated 02.03.2023 in an Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 39505 of 2022. Pursuant to said order dated 02.03.2023, the compromise entered between the parties concerned has been verified by the concerned court below on 21.03.2023. A copy whereof is on record as Annexure No. 7 to this application.
4-On the strength of aforesaid facts, it is submitted that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore, continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned chargesheet against the applicants after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court.
5-Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
6-After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost.
7-The Apex Court in case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others , AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Ramgopal and another vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh , 2021 Supreme (SC) 529 after wholesome treatment has laid down guidelines for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of
non-compoundable offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. on the basis of compromise, wherein quashing of proceeding of criminal cases which involved non compoundable offences has been approved by the Apex Court if the nature of the offence is private in nature and does not have a serious impact on society.
8-Considering the facts and circumstances of this case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court as mentioned above, I find that the case in hand does not have grave and wider social ramifications and the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties, therefore this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end.
9-In view of the above, criminal proceedings of case no. 3373 of 2022 (State vs. Krishna Kant Tiwari & others) arising out of case crime no. 399 of 2021 against the applicants are hereby quashed.
10-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above.
Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Saurabh
Digitally signed by :- SAURABH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
3 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under non-compoundable offences can be quashed where parties have settled and there is private dispute.
Whether continuation of prosecution after compromise fails to serve any useful purpose and is oppressive.
Whether the Court can exercise inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to end litigation in a fit case.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and othersRelied on¶12
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 · Who else cites this
Ramgopal and another vs. The State of Madhya PradeshRelied on¶12
Ramgopal and another vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 Supreme (SC) 529
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Krishna Kant Tiwari And 3 Others
Sanjay Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
