C482/2851/2019 of RAHUL Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 2851 of 2019(Under Section 482 CrPC)

Rahul & Others

…... Applicants

Versus

State of Uttarakhand & Another ….…Respondents

Mr. B.M. Pingal, Advocate, for the applicants. Mr. S.K. Chaudhary, Deputy Advocate General, for the State.

Mr. M.S. Bisht, 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 11.3.2018, summoning/cognizance order dated 14.8.2014 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2600 of 2018, State v. Rahul & Others, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 452, 504 and 506 IPC, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar.

Consequent upon the FIR lodged by the respondent no. 2 against accused applicants, 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 as well as the victim/respondent no. 3, it has been stated that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the complainant and the victim do not want to prosecute the accused applicants. Accused persons, the complainant and the victim, duly identified by their respective Counsel, are present in person before this Court. They admitted the contents of the compounding application and stated that

they have entered into compromise and amicably settled the dispute.

Learned State Counsel opposed the compounding application and contended that offence under Section 452 IPC is non-compoundable.

Needless to say, non-compoundable offence 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 11.3.2018, summoning/cognizance order dated 14.8.2014 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2600 of 2018, State v. Rahul & Others, under Sections 147, 323, 325, 452, 504 and 506 IPC, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Khatima, District Udham Singh Nagar, are hereby quashed. Present criminal miscellaneous application stands disposed of.

(N.S. Dhanik, J.) 18.12.2019