Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
Akhlak and two Others - Applicants
Vs.
State of Uttarakhand and Others - Respondents
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.2319 Of 2023
Decided On : 17-01-2024
QUASHING - CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS - The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the proceedings of a criminal case due to the resolution of private disputes between the parties involved, emphasizing the importance of substantial justice and the lack of support from witnesses for the prosecution.
Fact of the Case:
The applicants, Akhlak, Iqbal, and Bholu alias Afzal, sought to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No.83 of 2022, which involved serious charges under the Indian Penal Code. The informant and the injured party confirmed that they had resolved their disputes amicably and filed a Compounding Application.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that all witnesses had turned hostile and did not support the prosecution's case. Given the resolution of disputes and the parties living in harmony, the court found it appropriate to quash the proceedings to ensure justice.
Issues: Whether the court should exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings based on the resolution of disputes between the parties and the lack of prosecution support.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the exercise of inherent jurisdiction is justified when it serves the interests of real and substantial justice, particularly in cases where the parties have amicably resolved their disputes.
Result: The application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was allowed, and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.83 of 2022 were quashed.
JUDGMENT :
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
The present Application has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.83 of 2022, “State vs. Akhlak and Others”, pending before the court of IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital under Sections 307, 323, read with Section 34, Section 504 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. All the three applicants – accused persons, namely, Akhlak, Iqbal and Bholu alias Afzal are present in-person before this Court.
3. The respondent no.3 Rehan Iliyas, the informant, and the respondent no.4 Rizwan Ansari alias Rizwan Iliyas, the injured, are present in-person before this Court.
4. Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, learned counsel for the applicants.
5. Mr. V.K. Jemini, learned Deputy Advocate General for the State.
6. Mr. Mehboob Rahi, learned counsel for the respondent no.3 and respondent no.4.
7. All the three applicants are identified by Mr. Tajhar Qayyum, Advocate.
8. The respondent no.3 and the respondent no.4 are identified by Mr. Mehboob Rahi, Advocate.
9. Both, the applicants, the respondent no.3 and the respondent no.4 submitted that there were private disputes between them and they have resolved their disputes and after resolving their disputes they have filed a Compounding Application (IA No.01 of 2023) along with affidavits with their free will and without any pressure. They have requested to decide the matter on the basis of the compromise.
10. Learned counsel for the State submitted that all the witnesses of facts are declared hostile. They have not supported the case of the prosecution, therefore, the State has no objection to decide the present matter on the basis of the compromise.
11. The applicants, the respondent no.3 and the respondent no.4, after resolving their disputes, are living in peace and harmony.
12. In the said circumstances, in case, proceedings are allowed to continue, it would amount to denial of complete justice to the parties.
13. Therefore, it is a fit case, in which the inherent jurisdiction of this Court should be exercised to do real and substantial justice.
14. Consequently, the present Application (No.2319 of 2023), filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.83 of 2022, State vs. Akhlak and Others”, pending before the court of IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Haldwani, District Nainital under Sections 307, 323, read with Section 34, Section 504 and Section 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, are quashed.
AI
The court established that mutual settlement between parties can justify the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the CrPC, emphasizing the principle of substantial justice.
The court established that mutual consent and resolution of disputes between parties can lead to the quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
The court can quash criminal proceedings based on compromise and settlement between the parties, even if the offence is non-compoundable, in order to establish peace and harmony.
Quash of Criminal Proceeding - Amicable settlement – Power of High Court must have due regard to nature and gravity of crime - Ends of justice in terms of the compromise showing parties willingness t....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the wide plenitude of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings in which a compromise has been effected, not confin....
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
