The court emphasized the seriousness of the offence under Section 307 of IPC and the stage of the criminal trial in rejecting the Compounding Application and the C482 Application.

JUDGMENT :

The whole controversy arose because of the fact that respondent No. 5 herein, i.e. the son of respondent No. 4, is said to have married to one of the victim Jhanvhi, which was against the wishes of the parents, due to which the said incident had chanced on 23.05.2022.

2. The basic vertebra of the allegation is that respondent No. 5, for last about 3 years has been in an intimate relationship with Jhanvhi, i.e. the daughter of the applicant No. 1 herein and it was owing to the aforesaid relationship, that there was an ever accelerating acrimony amongst the two group of persons, which has resulted into the said incident of 23.05.2022, wherein it was observed that on the occasion of the marriage anniversary of Kartik i.e. respondent No. 5 herein, certain dispute took place and which has resulted into the applicants making an assault on the three victims, who had been named therein in the FIR i.e. Gulshan Kumar Bathla (respondent No. 4), Kartik (respondent No. 5) and Jhanvhi, who is not a party to the instant C482 Application, who had suffered injuries on the fingers of her hand.

3. There had been a specific allegation which has been leveled in the FIR, that Chaman Lohia i.e. the applicant No. 2 herein has made the assault on Gulshan Kumar Bathla, thereby causing serious injuries on his person and similarly he had also assaulted respondent No. 5 Kartik, causing injuries on his hand and head. Similarly, there was an open injury which was suffered by Jhanvhi Bathla on her hand, as observed in the FIR.

4. There cannot be any dispute that the FIR is not a sacrosanct. Prima facie, exclusively the FIR itself cannot be taken as to be the basis to come to a conclusion, as to whether at all the offence which has been complained of could be said to be an offence under Section 307 or not, because the FIR itself, which was registered on 04.05.2022, it was for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 504 & 506 of IPC, but, later on when the matter was investigated, the Investigating Officer, while submitting the Chargesheet as Chargesheet No. 216 of 2022, on 11.07.2022 had added the offence under Section 307 of IPC, on which the cognizance have been taken and the applicants have been later summoned to be tried for the offence under Sections 307, 323, 324, 452, 504 & 506 of IPC, as registered by way of Criminal Case No. 128 of 2022, State Vs. Rajkumar and others as it was registered before the Court of ACJM, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

5. The applicant to the C482 Application, while putting a challenge to the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 128 of 2022, has filed a Compounding Application under Section 320 of CrPC, contending thereof, that owing to the matrimony of Jhanvi with respondent No. 5, there now happens to be an established acceptable relationship inter se between the parties. In order to bring harmony amongst them, it would be in the wider interest of the parties, that the matter may be compounded. The second prospective for the purposes of enforcing Compounding Application was from the view point, that the Court has to reasonably consider as to whether the nature of offence which has been complained of, would be falling under the exceptions as provided under para 29.6 and 29.7 in the matters of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and Another, as reported in 2014 (6) SCC 466 of Narinder Singh (supra) for the purposes of compounding of the offence falling under Section 307 of IPC. The relevant paragraphs are extracted hereunder:-

“29.6. Offences under Section 307 IPC would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be generally treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there fo