In a bail application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a charge sheet based on a private compromise, the Court relied on Supreme Court precedent to hold that offences under Section 304 IPC cannot be extinguished via compromise and dismissed the application.
The application seeking quashing of the impugned charge sheet is dismissed.
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. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26654 of 2022
Applicant :- Ravi And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajendra Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for applicants in Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Brijesh Kumar Srivastava, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party no.2.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Charge Sheet No.98(A)/2021 dated 22.5.2021 submitted in Case Crime No.192 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 304, 324 I.P.C., Police Station Kagaraul, District Agra.
Present application came up for admission on 13.9.2022 and this Court passed the following order:-
"Shri Brejesh Srivastava, Advocate prays for is granted time to file Valatanama of behalf of the informant in the Registry within a week.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking the quashing the impugned charge sheet No.98(A)/2021 dated 22.05.2021 in Case No.4505 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.192 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 304, 324 IPC, Police Station- Kagaraul, DistrictAgra.
The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that through good offices of certain well-meaning persons the parties have amicably settled the dispute among themselves and have mutually compromised in the matter. According to the counsel there is no dispute left out any more in between the parties and they wish no more litigation in between them.
Let compromise, if any, be filed before trial court, where it shall be verified in presence of both sides and after its verification, certified copy of compromise along with verification order of trial court concerned, be filed on record of this Court, by way of supplementary affidavit.
List this case on 16th November, 2022 as fresh.
The further proceedings of the aforesaid case shall remain stayed with regard to the applicants till the next date of listing."
Subsequent to above order dated 13.09.2022 court below has verified the compromise entered into by the parties vide order dated 22.09.2022.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties is a purely private dispute and not a crime against the society. Parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties a compromise application was filed before court below, which has also been verified. In view of above, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging to proceedings of aforementioned criminal case. Interest of Justice shall be served in case the entire proceedings of aforementioned criminal case are quashed by this Court.
Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application. He submits that criminality committed by applicants is not private in nature but a crime against the society. Referring to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others, (2019) 5 SCC 688, he submits that no compromise can be made in respect of an offence under Section 304 I.P.C. As such, the present application is misconceived and is, therefore, liable to be dismissed.
When confronted with above, learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same.
Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others (Supra), the compromise entered by the parties cannot be accepted by this Court.
Consequently, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 4.1.2023 P.S.Parihar
Digitally signed by :- POORAN SINGH PARIHAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a compromise can be accepted to quash criminal proceedings for an offence under Section 304 IPC?
Whether the application seeking quashing of the charge sheet is liable to be allowed or dismissed?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and OthersRelied on¶18
State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others, (2019) 5 SCC 688 · Who else cites this
State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and OthersRelied on¶20
State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and Others (Supra)
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Ravi And Another
State of U.P. and Another
Rajeev Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
