The non-compoundable nature of the offense under Section 370 of the IPC and the wide connotation of 'exploitation' as contained under Explanation-1 to Section 370 were central legal points established in the judgment.

JUDGMENT :

Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

The present C-482 Application, which has been preferred by the applicant is emanating from a Criminal Case No. 5282 of 2017, which has been registered, as a consequence of the submission of the Charge Sheet, after completion of investigation, in relation to an FIR, being FIR No. 60 of 2018 dated 20.03.2017, which has been registered against the present applicant, for their involvement in commission of the offences under Sections 343, 370 and 120-B of the I.P.C., which was registered at Police Station, Raipur, Sadar, district Dehradun.

2. The applicant to the present C-482 Application had prayed for that the Charge Sheet, being Charge Sheet No. 93A of 2017 dated 31.10.2017, which has been submitted against the present applicant for his alleged involvement in the commission of offences under Sections 343, 370 and 120-B of the IPC, as well as, he has prayed for further quashing of the summoning order, as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5282 of 2017, State Vs. Ajay Malik.

3. During its pendency, the parties to the present C-482 Application have filed their Compounding Application (IA/532/2022), whereby, under a joint affidavit which had been submitted by the counsels, with the signatures of the respective parties to the proceedings, they have sought a composition of offence, as against which, the present applicant, was being tried by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, district Dehradun.

4. When the composition application was placed before the Court for its consideration, due to inability on part of the private respondent to physically appear before the Court, she was directed to participate through video conferencing, for the purposes of considering the Compounding Application.

5. The learned Senior Counsel for the applicant, who stands in support of the Compounding Application, seeking composition of the offences, for which the present applicant has been charged to be tried, is inclusive of the offence as contained under Section 370 of the IPC. To substantiate his argument, he submits that Section 370 of the IPC, could too be extended to be brought within an ambit of composition under Section 320 of the Cr.PC, though it is not included in the Table, appended to it, on the ground that if the statement of the complainant, which has been filed along with the counter affidavit on recorded under Section 164 of the Cr.PC, is taken into consideration, the Compounding Application deserves to be considered in the light of the statement which had been recorded therein.

6. This Court was called upon to have a comparative scrutiny of the set of allegations, which had been leveled in the FIR; along with the set of statement which has been made under Section 164 Cr.PC, in order to compound the offences. For the purposes to answer the argument, as to whether the statement recorded under Section 164, could be derived for the purposes to bring the ‘act of slavery’ as contained under Explanation-1, whether it will amount to be ‘an exploitation’, or not, the statement under Section 164 has to be extracted as a whole, wherein the complainant-respondent No. 2, she has specifically stated, that since October, 2016, when she requested the applicant to send her back, to her home, it was the applicant, who has made a statement that he will send the complainant/respondent No.2, herein back to her home subject to the condition that some alternative arrangement is made for a lady to work as a housemaid, in the house of the applicant.

7. This statement under Section 164 of the Cr.PC itself, will not be or could not be construed as to be the willingness, the expression which had been given by the complainant that she may be sent to her home in October, 2016, and thereafter the statement referred to in the statement recorded under Section 164 of the present applicant, of keeping the complainant in his home against her wishes till the time the alternate arrangement is made, that will itself amount to fall to