Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
SAMEER JAIN, J.
Bundu And 13 Others – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. and Another – Respondents
Application U/S 482 No.25082 of 2022
Decided on : 27-09-2022
QUASHING - Criminal Proceedings - Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC - The court discussed the legal provisions and principles related to quashing criminal proceedings based on a compromise between the parties. It emphasized that serious and heinous offences affecting society at large should not be quashed on the basis of a settlement. The court referred to several Supreme Court judgments to support its decision.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants sought to quash criminal proceedings against them based on a compromise executed between the parties. The case involved allegations of assault and attempted murder under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC. The injured parties had sustained serious injuries, and a compromise was executed after the charge sheet was submitted.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the offences alleged were serious and heinous, with a significant impact on society. It emphasized that the dispute was not private in nature and that the State had a duty to prosecute offenders in such cases. Therefore, it dismissed the application to quash the proceedings.
Issues: The main issue was whether the criminal proceedings should be quashed based on a compromise between the parties, considering the nature of the offences and their impact on society.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on Supreme Court judgments to establish that serious and heinous offences affecting society at large should not be quashed on the basis of a settlement. It emphasized the duty of the State to prosecute offenders in such cases.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the application to quash the proceedings, stating that the offences alleged were crimes against society and should not be quashed based on a compromise between the parties.
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Dr. S.B. Maurya, learned AGA for the State-respondent.
2. The instant application has been moved by the applicants with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of criminal case no. 1093 of 2020 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Garhmukteshwar, Hapur District Hapur as well as charge sheet dated 26.8.2020 and cognizance order dated 1.10.2020.
Brief facts of the case
3. Opposite party no. 2 lodged FIR of the present case on 7.5.2020 against the applicants under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC at P.S. Simbhawali District Hapur and according to the FIR, applicants who are 14 in numbers assaulted with intention to commit murder of Inam and Danish (injured persons of the case) and they opened fire from country-made pistols and in the incident, Inam and Danish sustained serious injuries. After registration of the FIR, investigation of the matter was commenced and during investigation, Investigating Officer recorded the statements of opposite party no. 2, the informant and injured persons Inam and Danish and also recorded the statement of other eye-witnesses and obtained the injury reports of both the injured and submitted charge sheet against the applicants on 26.8.2020 under sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 504, 506 IPC.
4. In the incident two persons Inam and Danish sustained injuries and according to the statement of injured-Inam, applicant no. 2 caused fire arm injury to him and Danish through country-made pistol. Another injured-Danish in his statement recorded during investigation also stated that applicants assaulted them with intention to commit murder and applicant nos. 2 and 6 opened fire from country-made pistols and due to fire opened by them he and Inam sustained injuries. Injury reports of both the injured persons, Inam and Danish are on record.
5. From the perusal of the injury report of Inam, it appears that he received a lacerated wound bone deep on the right side of scalp and bleeding was present and Doctor also noted that at the time of his medical examination, three episodes of vomiting and one episode of seizure occurred and was advised to C.T. Scan of head. From the perusal of his C.T. Scan report which is copied by the Investigating Officer in the case diary during investigation which is annexed alongwith annexure-2, it reflects that a hemorrhage in right parietal temporal region and depressed fracture of frontal bone was found and according to Doctor, injury was dangerous to life.
6. Another injured-Danish was also medically examined on 15.5.2020 and according to his injury report he sustained one abrasion of right side of forehead and a contusion of right side of upper back of scapular region and according to the Doctor both the injuries were simple in nature and caused by hard and blunt object.
7. From the perusal of the injury report of both the injured persons, it appears that injured Inam sustained serious fire arm injury which was, according to the Doctor who conducted C.T. Scan, dangerous to his life.
8. It appears that after submission of the charge sheet on 26.8.2022, cognizance was taken and notices were issued to the applicants and during the pendency of the case before committal, applicants, opposite party no. 2-informant and injured persons Inam and Danish compromised the matter and in this regard, they executed a compromise on 31.5.2022 (annexed as annexure-6 to the affidavit). Applicants want to quash proceedings pending before trial court on the basis of settlement dated 31.5.2022.
Submissions on behalf of the applicants
9. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants have been made accused in the present case on the basis of false and frivolous allegations and they neither assaulted nor they caused any injury to anyone but in spite of that charge sheet has been submitted against them in the present matter. He next
The main legal point established in the judgment is the distinction between heinous and serious offences and those of a predominantly civil character in determining whether to accept a compromise and....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the need to exercise the power under Section 482 of the Code sparingly and with caution, especially for heinous and serious offences, and to consid....
Offences under Section 307 IPC are serious and heinous, lacking the possibility of being quashed based on private compromise. Hence, societal interest in prosecuting such crimes prevails.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that heinous and serious offences, especially those involving societal impact, cannot be quashed based on compromise. The court emphasized the need....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the principles for quashing criminal proceedings based on compromise, considering the nature of the offences, societal impact, and the possibility ....
The court emphasized the reformatory purpose of criminal jurisprudence and the need to secure the ends of justice in exercising the inherent power for quashing the proceedings based on a compromise.
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
