Deepak Pal and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Deepak Pal and Ors. Vs State of Uttarakhand — Uttarakhand HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Compounding application (IA/1/2024) allowed and compromise accepted; entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, State v. Vikky @ Vikas and others (Case Crime No.213 of 2020) pending before the Court of Sessions Judge, Haridwar quashed; present C482 application and all other pending applications disposed of accordingly.

Issue for consideration

Whether the offences u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 504, 325 IPC and Sections 3(1)(y)(s) of the SC/ST Act, together with the entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, can be compounded and quashed on the basis of the compromise reached between the parties. +1 more

Court's answer

Since the parties have reached terms of compromise, there is a remote or bleak possibility of conviction, and it can safely be inferred that continuation of the criminal proceedings would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice; it is therefore a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

Ratio / Principle

The High Court, in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., can quash criminal proceedings, FIR or complaint notwithstanding that the offences are non-compoundable; Section 320 Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (relying on B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003)4 SCC 675).

Key takeaways

The compounding application (IA/1/2024) is allowed, the compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted, and the entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, State v. Vikky @ Vikas and others (Case Crime No.213 of 2020) pending before the Court of Sessions Judge, Haridwar for the offences u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 504, 325 IPC and Sections 3(1)(y)(s) of the SC/ST Act are quashed.ratio¶9

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Compounding of offences on compromise — quashing under Section 482 Cr.P.C. not barred by Section 320 Cr.P.C. even for non-compoundable offences, relying on B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003)4 SCC 675. All eight applicants and respondent nos.2-4 (informant and victims) present and identified in Court. Since parties had reached terms of compromise, remote/bleak possibility of conviction and continuance deemed unfair to the interest of justice. Compounding application IA/1/2024 allowed; compromise accepted; entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, State v. Vikky @ Vikas and others (Crime No.213 of 2020) pending before the Court of Sessions Judge, Haridwar for offences u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 504, 325 IPC and Sections 3(1)(y)(s) of the SC/ST Act quashed. C482 application No.778 of 2024 disposed of accordingly (Pankaj Purohit, J., 04.03.2025).

2023:UHC:4281

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No.778 of 2024 4 th March, 2025

Deepak Pal and Ors --Applicants

Versus

State of Uttarakhand and others --Respondents

Presence:Mr. S.K. Shandilya, Advocate for the Applicants. Mr. Vipul Painuly and Ms. Sweta Dobhal, learned B.Hs. for the State. Mr. Gaurav Singh, learned counsel for private respondents.

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Compounding application (IA/1/2024) has been moved on behalf of the parties seeking to compound the offences u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 504, 325 IPC and Sections 3(1)(y)(s) of the SC/ST Act along with entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, State v. Vikky @ Vikas and others (Crime No.213 of 2020) pending before the Court of Sessions Judge, Haridwar.

The ground for seeking compounding of offences is that parties have reached to the terms of compromise wherefor a settlement has also reached between them. It is thus, prayed that the present proceedings between the parties may be quashed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Learned State Counsel objected the compounding application arguing that the case relates to the SC/ST Act.

All the eight applicants as well as respondent nos.2, 3 and 4 (who are informant and victims) are present in the Court being duly identified by their respective counsel.

So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S.

1

2023:UHC:4281

Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another , reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: -

“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.”

Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint, and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Since the parties have reached to the terms of the compromise, this Court is of the firm opinion that there would a remote or bleak possibility of conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to permit continuation of the criminal proceedings. Since the answer to the aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

Accordingly, compounding application (IA/1/2024) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. With the result, the entire proceedings of SST No.20 of 2020, State v. Vikky @ Vikas and others (Case Crime No.213 of 2020) pending before the Court of Sessions Judge, Haridwar for the offences u/s 147, 148, 149, 323, 427, 504, 325 IPC and Sections 3(1)(y)(s) of the SC/ST Act are hereby quashed.

Present C482 application, along with all other pending applications, stands disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.) 04.03.2025

R.Dang

2