C482/2212/2023 of ASIF Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITALCriminal Misc. Application U/s 482 No. 2212 of 202325 March, 2025

Asif

Versus

--Applicant

State Of Uttarakhand & another

--Respondent

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presence:-

Mr. Manav Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant. Ms. Sweta Badola Dobhal, learned Brief Holder for the State. Mr. Prem Kaushal, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and victim.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Hon'ble Pankaj Purohit, J.

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

2. Compounding application (IA/2/2023) has been moved on behalf of the parties seeking to compound the offences u/s 354, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act along with entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.201 of 2022, State vs. Asif, pending in the court of learned ADJ/FTSC/Special Judge POCSO, Udham Singh Nagar.

3. The ground for seeking compounding of offences is that parties have reached to the terms of compromise wherefor 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.

4. Learned State Counsel raised preliminary objection to the effect that the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable.

2025:UHC:21705. Applicant (Asif), respondent no.2/informant (Jakir) and also the victim are present in the Court being duly identified by their respective counsel.

6. This Court interacted with the victim. She stated that she is pursuing her B.A. Course from the Government P.G. College, Bazpur, District Udham Singh Nagar. The incident alleged in the first information report is of the year 2021 when the victim was teenager and was studied in 9[th]Class.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that victim and the applicant are the close relative as the victim is niece of the applicant.

8. Since the victim is pursuing her career and wants to live good life, therefore, there is no useful purpose for keeping this criminal case pending and it will be futile exercise to ask the applicant to appear before the trial court as accused to face the trial.

9. So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675and 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 bar to the exercise of power ofquashing. It is, however, different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such power.”

10. 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.

2025:UHC:2170

11. Further, in view of the principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303as well as in the Transfer Petition (Criminal) No.115 of 2012, (Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal proceedings can be quashed by this Court, if this Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested to restore peace and harmony between them.

12. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is of the firm opinion that there would be 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 fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

13. Accordingly, compounding application (IA/2/2023) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. With the result, the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No.201 of 2022, State vs. Asif, u/s 354, 504, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 of the POCSO Act, pending in the court of learned ADJ/FTSC/Special Judge POCSO, Rudrapur, Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed qua the applicant.

14. Present criminal misc. application thus stands allowed. Other pending applications, stand disposed of accordingly. allowed. Other pending applications, stand disposed of accordingly.

(Pankaj Purohit, J.)

25.03.2025