High Court quashed criminal FIRs under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after parties settled despite non-compoundable Section 307 IPC charge, ordering release of accused.
Criminal proceedings and FIRs quashed; accused in custody released forthwith.
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.
criapln112-11
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.112 OF 2011
Hussain Khan S/o Salim Khan and others .. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
Shri V.D.Sapkal & Shri R.S.Deshmukh, Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri V.H.Dighe,Asstt.Public Pleader,for Respondent 1. Shri V.J.Dixit, Sr.Counsel for R.2.
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.114/2011
Abdul Aziz S/o Mohd. Nahadi Chaus and others
.. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. RESPONDENTS
criapln112-11
2
Shri V.J.Dixit, Senior Counsel i/b Shri Y.M.Khan,Adv.for petitioners.
Shri V.H.Dighe,Asstt.Public.Pleader for respondents. Shri V.D.Sapkal,Adv.for R.2.
CORAM : K.U.CHANDIWAL,J.
DATE :25th JANUARY, 2011.
PER COURT :
1] Heard learned counsel for respective parties. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally. The respective parties are identified by respective counsel.
2] The cross reports in terms of Crime No.7/2010 and 8/2010
are registered at Begumpura Police Station, Aurnagabad. The former being for an offence under Section 307 r.w. S.34 of I.P.C., while the later for offences under Sections 323, 326, 504,
506 r.w. S.34 of I.P.C.
3] Akram Khan the complainant in the later case informed that while he was near Begumpura Square, crackers were burst
criapln112-11
3
by few persons. He named them and when he was trying to pacify them, three of the suspects abused him and from them, one assaulted brutally at his shoulder, resultantly he suffered bleeding injury. This is supported by medical certificate.
4] The informant in Crime No.7/2010 Abdul Aziz described the event dated 11/1/2010 as having taken place in the square of Begumpura, where crackers were burst and he named the suspects as Afsarkhan, Alimkhan and Hussainkhan with swords or an identical weapon. One of them was holding a rod and since informant was acquitted, the above referred persons brutally assaulted him. Consequently, the offence was registered as stated above, inviting infraction of Section 307 r.w. S.34 of I.P.C.
5] The counsel representing respective parties in presence of Hussainkhan and Abdul Aziz submits that respective complainants have patched their controversies, they want to live a peaceful life and the incident that has taken place was in a hit of anger.
criapln112-11
4
6] The counsel submits that since the matter has been patched, exceptional nature and purpose of accusations needs sympathetic consideration. The Court has power in terms of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings.
7] Having read the respective petitions, I find, allowing the proceedings to continue, would be certainly abuse of process of law. As the parties have patched their relations, even if they are directed to face the trial, the outcome would be wastage of individual energy, time resulting acquittal. The commission of offence was out of anguish and the assault even if stated to be attempt to murder, its agonies are suffered by the respective parties being languished in fetters. Over the passage of time, due to healing of injuries and feelings too, the matter is settled between the parties. They desire to deploy the policy of forget and forgive and consequently urged to quash the proceedings. I am alive to the fact that offence u/s 307 is not compoundable u/s 320 Cr.P.C. However, powers u/s 482 Cr.P.C. are neither curtailed nor limited by any other provision. Each case projects
criapln112-11
5
a different set of situation.
8] In the above stated facts, I find that though the nature of accusation is of a grave nature, consequent to its impact on the society, still, the interse resolution calls for a action in terms of S.482 Cr.P.C. The learned A.P.P. submits that after the two events referred on 11/1/2010, there is no untoward activity found on record. The learned A.P.P. has left the matter to the discretion of this Court in terms of Section 482 of Cr.P.C.
9] Having gone through the respective reports and papers, settlement affidavits, I am satisfied that the matter needs exercise of power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. being an exceptional case. It is clarified that this power is exercised only restricting to this case in terms of Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and shall not be set as a precedent to take identical recourse.
10] Consequently, the proceedings against each of the accused-applicant in Crime No.7/2010 and Crime No.8/2010 registered at Begumpura Police Station, Aurangabad, registered
6 criapln112-11
at the instance of respective respondents, stand quashed and set aside. Resultantly, accused (petitioner no.2) Afsar Khan S/o Yasin Khan, Petitioner No.3 Alim Khan S/o Yasin Khan who are in the custody, be released forthwith.
11] Since F.I.R. is quashed, further proceedings in respective case being Sessions Case No.406/2010 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Aurangabad and also F.I.R. in Crime No.8/10 and Case No. I-04/2011 filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Auragnabad also are quashed and set aside. Both the Applications are accordingly allowed as above. Rule made absolute in above terms.
(K.U.CHANDIWAL)
JUDGE
umg/criapln112-11
1 issue framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings in quashed cases be quashable.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Hussain Khan S/o Salim Khan and others
Abdul Aziz S/o Mohd. Nahadi Chaus and others
The State of Maharashtra and another
K.U.CHANDIWAL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
