Back
IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT, (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)(ITANAGAR BENCH)
ROBIN PHUKAN, J.
Debia Tadam, Son of Shri Debia Rebia and 2 Ors. – Appellant
Versus
The State Of AP – Respondent
Crl.Petn. 1 of 2022
Decided on : 30-03-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 384, 419, 506 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 320, 482 – Quashing the First Information Report – Quashing the criminal proceedings – By this joint petition under Section 482 read with Section 320 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, petitioner , petitioner No. 2-Shri, and petitioner , who are accused and complainant, respectively, approached this Court for quashing F.I.R. of P.S. Case corresponding to G.R. Case , on basis of one settlement deed entered into by them – Held, In case in hand, since parties have resolved dispute amicably between themselves and entered into a Settlement Deed and on that basis, they have approached this Court for quashing proceeding, there is unlikelihood of deposing against petitioner Nos. 1 & 2, in learned Court below, by petitioner No. 3 if proceeding is allowed to continue and as such, further proceeding before learned Court below would be an abuse of process of Court – Petition allowed.
JUDGMENT :
By this joint petition under Section 482 read with Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the petitioner No. 1-Shri Debia Tadam, the petitioner No. 2-Shri Nangbia Jhony, and the petitioner No. 3-Shri Tana Doji, who are the accused and the complainant, respectively, approached this Court for quashing the F.I.R. of Doimukh P.S. Case No. 32/2015, corresponding to G.R. Case No. 482/2015, on the basis of one settlement deed entered into by them.
2. The factual background leading to filing of the present petition is adumbrated herein below:-
3. Heard Mr. T. Torum, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. J. Tsering, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent.
4. Mr. T. Torum, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that while the case was pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, the petitioners, who are complainant and accused here in this case, entered into a Settlement Deed, dated 06.01.2022, and on the basis of the said Settlement Deed, the petitioners filed the present petition for quashing the F.I.R. and subsequent proceeding pending before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia. Mr. Torum, learned counsel for the petitioners, further submits that the offences are not serious in nature and the parties have settled the entire dispute amongst themselves and they are not willing to pursue the same and, therefore, it is contended to allow the petition.
5. Per contra, Mr. J. Tsering, learned Public Prosecutor for the State respondent, on the other hand, submits that since the parties have settled the matter entirely amongst themselves and since the offences are not serious in nature involving mental depravity and not against the society and as such, the State has no objection in the event of allowing the petition.
6. Having heard the submissions of learned Advocates of both sides, I have carefully gone through the petition and the documents placed on record and also gone through the LCR, received from the learned Court below.
7. The allegation against the petitioner Nos. 1 & 2 is that they, having used informant/petitioner No. 3, who is the Convenor of All Nyishi Student Union (ANSU), committed extortion from NIT Institute, Yupia, and also threatened OSD NIT, Yupia, and the NIT Professors to get their salary to them by using Mobile No. 9436016754. The petitioners have been identified as the accused in the course of investigation.
8. A perusal of the Settlement deed, dated 06.01.2022, reveals that the petitioner Nos. 1 & 2, who are accused in this case, have entered into a Settlement Deed with the petitioner No. 3, the complainant/Shri Tana Doje, having settled the case amicably outside the Court, which is pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Yupia, at the initial stage of trial. They have agreed to withdraw the case jointly from the Court on the ground that there was misunderstanding between the parties, and they have also filed one Application before the Police for closing the case
The veracity of complainant’s allegations of coercion and duress would also have to be tested in any other appropriate proceedings. Be that as it may, once complainant has claimed that settlement agr....
The central legal point established in the judgment is that the court has the power to quash criminal proceedings involving non-compoundable offences in view of the compromise between parties, provid....
The court may quash non-compoundable offences when there is a personal settlement between parties, provided it does not impact societal interests.
The court can quash FIR and proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when disputes have been amicably settled between the parties and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the prosecution.
Powers of High Court under Section 482 to quash criminal proceedings where dispute is of a private nature and a compromise is entered into between the parties who are willing to settle their differen....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
