C482/1080/2019 of ISLAM Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 1080 of 2019(Under Section 482 CrPC)

Islam & Another

…... Applicants

Versus

State of Uttarakhand & Another ….…Respondents

Mr. Bilal Ahmed, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. Dinesh Chauhan, Brief Holder, for the State. Mr. Mohd. Umar, Advocate, for the complainant.

Hon’ble N.S. Dhanik, J.

This Criminal Miscellaneous Application, under Section 482 CrPC, along with compounding application, is preferred to quash the chargesheet dated 9.10.2016, summoning order dated 11.11.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1471/2016, State v. Islam & Others, under Sections 452, 354 and 120B IPC IPC, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1[st], Roorkee, District Haridwar.

Consequent upon the FIR lodged by the respondent no. 2 against applicant no. 1 Islam and applicant no. 2 Kasna Parveen (who is the real mother of the complainant), investigation was made and chargesheet was submitted and thereafter the accused applicants have been summoned to face trial for the aforementioned offences.

In the compounding application, duly supported by the affidavits of applicant no. 1 and the complainant/respondent no. 2, it has been stated that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the complainant does not want to prosecute the accused. Accused persons and the complainant, duly identified by their respective Counsel, are present in person before this Court. They admits the contents of the compounding application.

Learned State Counsel opposed the compounding application and contended that offences under Sections 452 and 354 IPC are non-compoundable.

Needless to say, non-compoundable offences cannot be compounded. But considering the proposition of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I. & Ors,(2008) 9 SCC 677;B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana & Anr. reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675, and inGian Singh v. State of Punjab & Another, (2012) 10

SCC 303, where there is genuine compromise and there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and continuance of the proceedings, after the compromise having been arrived at between the parties, would be futile exercise, the compromise should be accepted and the proceedings should be quashed.

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the legal proposition propounded by the Hon’ble Apex Court, compounding application is allowed. Compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted.

Consequently, the chargesheet dated 9.10.2016, summoning order dated 11.11.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1471/2016, State v. Islam & Others, under Sections 452, 354 and 120B IPC IPC, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 1[st], Roorkee, District Haridwar, are hereby quashed. Present criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of. Inform the Court concerned accordingly.

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 2.7.2019

Prabodh