IN THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) KOHIMA BENCH
KAKHETO SEMA, J.
Shri Puronen S/O Kumsangtoba – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Nagaland And Anr – Respondent
Crl.L.P. 2 of 2022
Decided on : 25-10-2022
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 363, 506, 34, 325, 352 –Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section, 320, 482 – Copy of judgment to be given to accused and other persons – Whoever commits offence of criminal intimidation shall be punished with imprisonment of either description – High Court or State Government, as case may be, may withdraw all or any of powers conferred by it under this Code on any person – Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe – Judgment in every trial in any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court by Presiding officer – Petitioner has filed present petition under section Cr.P.C, 1973 to set aside and quash FIR which is registered as P.S Case corresponding to G.R Charge Sheet and criminal proceeding pending in G.R before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaland – Held, In light of discussions made above and law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme of India, this Court is not inclined to accept settlement executed between rival parties to set aside and quash criminal proceeding/trial which is pending against petitioner in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagaland in P.S Case corresponding to G.R in exercise of inherent power under section Cr. P.C – Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
Heard Mr. N. Longkumer, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. K. Angami, learned P.P. for the State respondent No.1 and Mr. M. Solo, learned counsel for the respondent No.2.
2. The petitioner has filed the present petition under section 482 Cr.P.C, 1973 to set aside and quash the FIR dated 21/02/2018 which is registered as Changtongya P.S Case No. 005/2018 corresponding to G.R No. 32/2018, the Charge Sheet No. 02/19 dated 06/02/2019 and the criminal proceeding pending in G.R No. 32/2018 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mokokchung, Nagaland.
3. The petitioner is the alleged accused person against whom the criminal case has been registered. The respondent No.2 is the complainant and the sister of the victim in the case.
4. The case in brief is that on 21/02/2018, the respondent No.2 filed the FIR to the Officer-in-Charge, Changtongya Police Station stating that at about 9:00 A.M one Mr. Tuten of Merangkong village along with the supporters of Shri. Nuklutoshi, the NPF candidate had adducted her brother Mr. Alemyanger (victim). On receiving the information, the Police registered the Changtongya P.S Case No. 005/2018 under section 363/506/34 IPC. Subsequent to the filing of the FIR, Mr. Alemyanger, the victim was released on the same day with serious bodily injuries. The victim was first treated at Mokokchung but later shifted to Zion Hospital, Dimapur. In the course of the investigation of the case the involvement of the petitioner was revealed by the victim and the petitioner was arrested from Tuensang on 15/03/2018. The petitioner who is serving as the constable in the 3rd NAP Battalion, Nagaland was at the time of the incident attached to Shri. Nuklutoshi, the NPF candidate. The prosecution sanction was accordingly sought for and accorded by the competent authority to prosecute the petitioner in the case. On completion of the investigation, the Police submitted the Charge Sheet dated 06/02/2019 against the accused under section 363/506/325/352 IPC. The case is pending trial before the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mokokchung.
5. On 30.12.2020, the petitioner and Mr. Alemyanger, the victim under the initiative of the social organisation namely, the Chuchuyimlang Nungshikumnba Aso Kidong of Dimapur and Kohima Units executed the agreement for compromising the misunderstanding between them in the spirit of forgive and forget in honour of the 100 years centenary celebration of Chuchuyimlang Baptist Church. So also the petitioner, the respondent No.2 and the victim also executed the compromise dated 30/12/2020 for withdrawal of the criminal case pending against the petitioner.
6. Subsequent to the signing of the agreement, Mr. Alemyanger (the victim) unfortunately expired in the month of February, 2021.
7. Mr. N. Longkumer, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the incident occurred at Chuchuyimlang village during the State Assembly Election, 2018 due to some animosity between the supporters of the opposing political parties and this also resulted in physical assault to the victim. The complaint was thereafter lodged by the respondent No.2, the sister of the victim. However, during the course of the trial, the parties under the initiative of the Chuchuyimlang Nungshikumba Aso Kidong of Dimapur and Kohima Units have amicably settled the matter by executing the agreement and the compromise both dated 30/12/2020. The learned counsel for the petitioner accordingly submits that even if the trial is allowed to proceed against the petitioner the chances of the trial ending in conviction of the petitioner is remote in view of the compromise entered between the parties. The learned counsel accordingly submits that the Hon’ble Court may be gracious to accept the compromise executed between the parties and to quash the criminal proceeding pending against the petitioner.
8. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied in the case of Shiji Alias Pappu & Others vers
Narinder Singh & Others -versus-State of Punjab & Another
Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Others -versus-State of Gujarat & Another
State of Rajasthan -versus-Shambhu Kewat & Another
State of Madhya Pradesh -versus-Laxmi Narayan & Others
Shiji Alias Pappu & Others versus Radhika & Another
Varala Bharath Kumar & Another -versus-State of Telangana & Another
High Court can quash non-compoundable FIRs under Section 482 when parties reach amicable settlements, preserving justice and avoiding abuse of process.
The High Court can quash non-compoundable offences under Section 482 if they are personal in nature and the parties have settled their disputes amicably, ensuring no adverse effect on public interest....
The main legal point established is that the High Court can quash criminal proceedings based on a compromise, even for non-compoundable offences, if it serves the ends of justice and does not impact ....
Heinous and serious offences cannot be quashed based on a compromise between the parties, as per the principle laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
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.