Back
2020 Supreme(All) 766
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.
Rajesh Kumar and Others - Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Opposite Parties
Application U/S 482 No. - 14973 of 2020
Decided On : 01-12-2020
Advocate Appeared:
For the Applicant : Sharique Ahmed Counsel
Point of Law: offence under Section 376 IPC is a grievous offence and also against the society at large, and that such matters should not be compromised, still it quashed the proceedings of the criminal case on the basis of the compromise, as the settlement was arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of the offence, taking the view that liberal approach should be adopted in accepting the settlement, to quash the criminal proceedings. This Court is of the view that merely because the parties have arrived at a settlement at the initial stages, the criminal proceedings with respect to heinous offences, like rape etc cannot be quashed. Such a consideration is a relevant consideration for quashment of the proceedings which may be quashed on the basis of compromise in exercise of inherent jurisdiction.
Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Sections 202, 482 – Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 392, 504, 506, 376 – Quash of criminal proceeding – Quash the summoning order – Applicants have filed the present application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (Code/Cr.P.C.) with the prayers quash the criminal proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case under Sections 392, 504, 506, 376, IPC in respect of applicant no.3 and under Sections 392, 504, 506, IPC in respect of applicant nos. 1, 2 & 4, Police Station-Gursahayganj, District Kannauj, pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Kannauj, in terms of compromise entered between the parties on 01.02.2020 – Quash the summoning order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (D.A.A.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Kannauj, in Criminal Complaint Case No.105 of 2017 (Shobha Devi Vs. Veerpal and others), under Sections 392, 504, 506, 376, IPC in respect of applicant no.3 and under Sections 392, 504, 506, IPC in respect of applicant nos. 1, 2 & 4, Police Station-Gursahayganj, District Kannauj, in terms of compromise entered between the parties on 01.02.2020 –
Finding of the Court:
There are no chances of conviction or such chances are remote and bleak, as no witness would be coming forward to depose against the applicants in view of the compromise, also deserves rejection, in as much, as in the case of ‘Dhuruv Gurjar’(Supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that it is not in every case where the complainant has entered into a compromise with the accused, there may not be any conviction – In a given case, it may happen that the prosecution still can prove the guilt by leading cogent evidence and examining the other witnesses and the relevant evidence/material, more particularly when the dispute is not a commercial transaction and/or of a civil nature and/or is not a private wrong – If the offences against the applicants are not proved in trial, they would be acquitted, but it cannot be said, at this stage, that the prosecution cannot prove the quilt or there may not be any conviction. – Court finds that the application under Section 482 for quashing of the entire proceedings of the same Criminal Complaint Case was dismissed on merits by this Court, vide judgment, and it was thereafter that the compromise has been entered into. As such, the submission that the compromise has taken place at the initial stage cannot be accepted. – Any compromise or settlement with respect to the offence of rape, against the honour of a woman, which shakes the very core of her life and tantamounts to a serious blow to her supreme honour, offending both, her esteem and dignity, is not acceptable to this Court – Application/petition under Section 482, for quashment of the proceedings of the complaint case in view of the compromise, deserves to be rejected – It is accordingly, rejected. –
Result: Application Rejected
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Sharique Ahmed, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashish Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Pankaj Sexena, learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the material brought on record.
2. The applicants have filed the present application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure (Code/Cr.P.C.) with the following main prayers:-
"(i) Quash the criminal proceeding of Criminal Complaint Case No.105 of 2017 (Shobha Devi Vs. Veerpal and others), under Sections 392, 504, 506, 376, IPC in respect of applicant no.3 and under Sections 392, 504, 506, IPC in respect of applicant nos. 1, 2 & 4, Police Station-Gursahayganj, District Kannauj, pending before the Additional District Judge, Court No.2, Kannauj, in terms of compromise entered between the parties on 01.02.2020.
(ii) Quash the summoning order dated 27.07.2018 passed by the learned Special Judge (D.A.A.)/Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Kannauj, in Criminal Complaint Case No.105 of 2017 (Shobha Devi Vs. Veerpal and others), under Sections 392, 504, 506, 376, IPC in respect of applicant no.3 and under Sections 392, 504, 506, IPC in respect of applicant nos. 1, 2 & 4, Police Station-Gursahayganj, District Kannauj, in terms of compromise entered between the parties on 01.02.2020."
3. Facts of the case are that the alleged incident took place on 29.05.2017 and again on 04.06.2017 with respect to which the complainant opposite party no.2 filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 07.06.2017, registered as a Complaint Case No.105 of 2017, under Sections 392, 504, 506, 376, IPC, Police Station Gursahaiganj, District Kannauj, in the Court of learned 4th Additional District & Session Judge/ Special Judge Dacoiti, Kannauj, inter alia on the averments that the applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 are known criminals, and for last several months the applicant no.3 Veerpal was trying to outrage her modesty and tried to commit rape on her. The applicant nos.1, 2 and 3 forcibly entered in the house of the complainant on 29.05.2017 around 6.00 P.M. and committed 'marpeet' with her husband, and also assaulted the son of the complainant by knife. They received injuries. The applicants threatened the complainant that in case she did not compromise the pending matters, she and her entire family would be killed. On 04.06.2017 the applicants again entered forcibly in the house of the complainant having country made pistol in their hand; they started abusing her; committed loot in her house and the applicant no.3 committed rape upon her and also snatched jewelry and tried to strangulate the complainant's neck.
4. The Magistrate proceeded with the complaint, recorded the statement of the complainant/opposite party no.2 under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and of her witnesses Ram Prakash and Shiva Yadav under Section 202 Cr.P.C. The Magistrate took cognizance on 27.08.2017 and passed the summoning order, whereby the applicant nos. 1, 2 and 4 were summoned under Sections 392, 504, 506, IPC and the applicant no.3 was summoned under Sections 392, 504, 506, and 376, IPC, to face the trial.
5. The applicants have further submitted that on 29.05.2017 the complainant/opposite party no.2 and her family members committed marpeet with the mother of the applicants in which she received injuries. After the incident, one NCR was lodged by the mother of the applicant nos. 1, 2 and 3 on 29.05.2017 itself. The opposite party no.2 and her family members again committed incident dated 30.07.2017 with respect to which the applicant no.4 filed a complaint under Sections 427, 452, 323, 504, 506, 395, 354, 376, IPC, against the opposite party no.2 and her family members registered as Complaint Case No.156 of 2017 (Smt. Renu Vs. Sarvesh and others), in which the statements of the complainant under Section 200 Cr.P.C. and of the witnesses under Section 202 Cr.P.C. were recorded and the matter was pending at the stage of summoning.
6. Earlier, the applicants approached this Court in Cr
