SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(UK) 565

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Rakesh Thapliyal, J.
Resham Singh - Petitioner
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and others - Respondents
Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1073 of 2023 With Compounding Application No. IA/2/2023 Urgency Application No. IA/4/2023 With Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1052 of 2023 With Compounding Application No. IA/2/2023 With Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 1075 of 2023 With Compounding Application No. IA/2/2023
Decided On : 15-02-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. S.K. Mandal
For the Respondent: Mr. Saurabh Pandey, learned Brief Holder, Mr. Bhupendra Singh Koranga, Mr. Ajeet Kumar Yadav

IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that consent from the complainant can allow for compounding even in cases involving non-compoundable offences under the SC/ST Act when misunderstandings are resolved.

Headnote:

Compounding - Criminal Writ Petitions - IPC Sections 323, 504, 506; SC/ST Act Section 3(1) - The court interpreted the compoundability of offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act, allowing compounding based on the resolution of disputes among parties.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners sought to quash an FIR and charge-sheet related to offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act, claiming the incident arose from misunderstandings, which were resolved with the complainant's consent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the offences under IPC were compoundable, and despite the SC/ST Act's usual non-compoundability, the complainant's statement of misunderstanding warranted allowing the compounding applications.

Issues: Whether the FIR and charge-sheet could be quashed based on the resolution of disputes and the nature of the offences under IPC and the SC/ST Act.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the consent of the complainant and the resolution of disputes justified the quashing of the FIR and charge-sheet, despite the non-compoundable nature of certain offences under the SC/ST Act.

Result: The FIR and charge-sheet were quashed, and the Criminal Writ Petitions were disposed of.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. The present Criminal Writ Petitions have been preferred along with the Compounding Applications, which are supported with the affidavits of the petitioners and the complainant. All the petitioners and respondent No. 4 are present in person before this Court and they are duly identified by their respective counsel through their Aadhaar Cards.

2. By the instant writ petitions, earlier, the relief was sought for quashing of the First Information Report, bearing FIR No. 0210 of 2023, but, subsequently, after filing of the charge-sheet on 26.09.2023, bearing chargesheet No. 240 of 2023, wherein the cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate on 03.11.2023, an Amendment Application was filed in WPCRL No. 1073 of 2023, challenging the charge-sheet as well as the cognizance order and the Amendment Application was allowed on 04.01.2024.

3. The aforesaid FIR No. 0210 of 2023 was lodged by respondent No. 4 Rohit Kumar Balmiki against three persons, namely, Resham Singh, Mohd. Wasif and Malkeet Singh Dhillo @ Meet for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC read with Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 and after submission of the chargesheet, the cognizance was taken by the learned Magistrate in respect of the aforesaid offences on 03.11.2023.

4. Now, the Compounding Application has been moved along with the writ petition. It is contended in the Compounding Application that in fact no such incident was happened and due to some misunderstandings, the FIR was lodged subsequently. They all belong to the same area and now they have resolved their disputes due to the intervention of the elderly persons of the locality and as such they want to close the proceedings.

5. Mr. S.K. Mandal, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in respect of quashing of the First Information Report, the other two co-accused persons, namely, Malkeet Singh Dhillo @ Meet and Mohd. Wasif also filed two separate criminal writ petitions, bearing WPCRL No. 1075 of 2023 and WPCRL No. 1052 of 2023, wherein a relief has been sought for quashing of the same FIR, lodged by the respondent No. 4 dated 25.07.2023, bearing FIR No. 0210 of 2023.

6. The other co-accused persons, namely Malkeet Singh Dhillo @ Meet and Mohd. Wasif are also present in the Court and this Court also interacted each of them and they also submitted that now they have resolved their disputes.

7. It is also contended by the learned counsel for the parties of both the Criminal Writ Petitions, i.e. WPCRL No. 1075 of 2023 and WPCRL No. 1052 of 2023, separate Compounding Applications are also clubbed with the present C482 Applications and are listed today.

8. This Court also interacted with the complaint, who is present in the Court, who submitted that due to some misunderstandings, the FIR was lodged; now they have resolved their disputes and he does not want to proceed with the case.

9. Mr. Saurabh Pandey, learned Brief Holder for the State submits that the offences punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC are compoundable, but the offences punishable under Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 are not compoundable, however, since the complainant has submitted that due to misunderstanding this FIR was lodged, therefore, the offence punishable under Section 3(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 can also be compounded.

10. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and after taking into consideration the grounds as taken in the respective Compounding Applications filed in the respective Criminal Writ Petitions and further on interaction with the petitioners and the complainant, this Court is of the view that the Compounding Applications deserve to be allowed.

11. Accordingly, the Compounding Application Nos. IA/2/2023, IA/2/2023 and IA/3/2023 are allowed.

12. Consequently, the FIR No. 0210 of 2010

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top