IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SAMIR J. DAVE, J.
Parmar Rameshbhai Pratapbhai & 2 others – Appellants
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondents
R/Criminal Revision Application No. 888 of 2016
Decided on : 20-06-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 323, 325, 504, 506(2), 114 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – section 397, 401 – Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt – Punishment for voluntarily causing grievous hurt – By this application under section 397 read with section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, applicants have prayed for reliefs – Held, It was also observed that exercise of inherent powers by High Court would depend upon facts and circumstances of each case – It is not permissible to have a straight jacket formula – No precise and inflexible guidelines can be provided – Settlement has brought peace in the society and parties who were once aggrieved, are now contended and are willing to lead harmonious life – In such circumstances, continuance of criminal proceedings will not serve any purpose – On contrary, it would harassing and also counteractive to congenial relationship which is restored between parties – Application allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. By this application under section 397 read with section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicants have prayed for the following reliefs:
(B) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to call for records and proceedings of below mentioned Annexure-A and B from the Hon’ble Trial Court;
(C) This Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by JMFC, Waghodiya in C.C. Case No.383/2012 and in Criminal Appeal No.76/2013- New No.12/2015 by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Savli, Vadodara at Savli dated 21.10.2016 at Annexure-A and B;
(D) Pending admission, hearing and final disposal of this petition, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant bail to the petitioners as they were on bail during the trial.
(E) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to dispense with the affidavit of the petitioners as the petitioners are in jail;
(F) This Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass such other and further order/s as may be deemed necessary.”
2. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their disputes, learned advocate for respondent no.2- original complainant jointly with learned advocate for the applicants submitted that offence may be permitted to be compounded.
3. It appears from the record that applicants were put to trial in the Court of the learned Additional Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate First Class, in Criminal Case No.383 of 2012 for the offences punishable under sections 323, 325, 504, 506(2) and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court vide judgment and order dated 29.06.2013 held the applicants herein guilty for the offence punishable under sections 325 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code.
4. As the applicants came to be convicted by the Trial Court, they preferred Criminal Appeal No.12/2015 (Old Case No.76/2013) in the Court of the learned 4th Additional District and Sessions Judge, Vadodara at Savli. The appeal came to be rejected by the learned Sessions Court, Vadodara vide order dated 21.10.2016 and applicants herein were convicted for the offence punishable under sections 325 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Being aggrieved with the same, the applicants have come up with this application.
5. The respondent no.2 being heir of original first informant is produced on record an affidavit, wherein the original complainant confirms about the settlement having been arrived at. In the affidavit, the complainant stated as under:
2. I say and submit that in relation to said FIR the learned trial Court passed the order of conviction against the petitioners and same has been challenged by way of Criminal Appeal before the learned Sessions Court Vadodara at Savli which came to be rejected. I say and submit that against both the order petitioner herein filed present Criminal Revision Application before this Hon’ble Court.
3. I say and submit that the grievances between petitioners and me have been amicably settled due to interference of relatives and colleagues. Therefore, there is nothing left for me to proceed against them before any Court. I say that there is no permanent nature of injury to me and we are living in same village since long peacefully without any grievance.
4. I say that there is no force, coercion or undue influence on me from any corner.
5. I say and submit that I have no grievance if the Hon’ble Court quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the JMFC Court
Abasaheb Yadav Honmane Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in (2008) 2 MhLJ 856
B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana reported in (2003) 4 SCC 675
Inherent powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure or extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India include powers to quash FIR, investigation or any criminal....
The court has the inherent power to quash criminal proceedings in accordance with the guidelines engrafted in such power, especially in cases where the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak, ....
The High Court can quash criminal proceedings if a compromise is reached, provided the nature of the crime allows for such action and the possibility of conviction is deemed remote.
The power to quash criminal proceedings based on a settlement between the parties depends on the facts and circumstances of each case, and the court must consider the nature and gravity of the crime,....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.