WPCRL/1774/2021 of RAJ KUMAR Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL

Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1774 of 2021

Raj Kumar

...….......Petitioner

State of Uttarakhand and others ……...Respondents

Mr. Akshay Latwal, learned counsel for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Adhkari, learned, Deputy A.G. for the State. Mr. Prateek Tripathi, learned counsel for the respondent no.4.

Hon’ble Narayan Singh Dhanik, J.

This is the second writ petition, which has been filed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties. First petition was disposed of on 19.07.2021 in terms of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and another, reported in (2014) 7 SCC 273.

2. Present criminal writ petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking the following reliefs:

“(i) Issue writ or order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned first information report dated 23.05.2021 being case crime no. 0154 of 2021, under Sections 420 IPC, at Police Station Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar. certiorari quashing the impugned first information report dated 23.05.2021 being case crime no. 0154 of 2021, under Sections 420 IPC, at Police Station Transit Camp, District Udham Singh Nagar.

(ii) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(iii) Award the cost of the writ petition in favour of the petitioner.” the petitioner.”

2. Now, parties have filed joint compounding application being IA No. 02 of 2021 stating therein that they have entered into compromise and amicably settled their disputes and now the complainant/respondent no. 4 does not have any grievance with the petitioner. In support of compounding application, affidavits have been filed by the petitioner as well as respondent no. 4 / complainant- Jagdish Pandey. Petitioner and respondent no. 4, duly identified by their respective Counsels, are present before this Court and they ratify the above facts too. Application bears the signature and respondent no. 4. They have further stated that now they have amicably settled their disputes. Therefore, learned Counsel for the parties have submitted that the impugned FIR be quashed in terms of the compromise.

3. Learned State Counsel submits that the offence under Section 420 IPC is compoundable offence with the permission of the Court.

4. In view of the above, as also the authority of the Hon’ble Apex Court and also 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 in Gian 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.

5. 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.

6. Consequently, theimpugned first information report dated 23.05.2021 registered Case Crime No. 0154 of 2021, under Sections 420 IPC, at Police Station Transit Canmp, District Udham Singh Nagar,is quashed qua the petitioner in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

7. Writ petition stands disposed of accordingly.

Kaushal

(Narayan Singh Dhanik, J.) 22.09.2021