Court No. - 2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 7581 of 2022

Petitioner :- Farhana And 4 Others

Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others

Counsel for Petitioner :- Dhananjay Kumar Mishra

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

1. By way of this petition the petitioners have prayed for the

stay of the arrest of the petitioners in pursuance of F.I.R. dated

2.6.2022 registered as case crime No. 145 of 2022, under

sections 147, 452, 504, 506, 427, 323, 420 IPC, P.S. Kila,

District Bareilly and further to direct the respondent authority

not to take any coercive action against the petitioners.

2. The genesis of the case is that the sale deed was executed in

favour of petitioners No. 2 and 3 without any fear and pressure

by the respondent No. 4 and petitioner no. 1 is the formal

witness of the aforesaid sale deed.

3. The offences which are alleged to be committed are

compoundable / non compoundable whereas it is relevant to

mention here that on the ground of denial of the prosecution

story by the respondent No. 4/ informant, the instant FIR may

be quashed.

4. The offence which are alleged also comprising of non

compoundable offence, however while going through the FIR it

may be seen that even if the matter goes for trial, the injured

and the complainant rather the lodger of the FIR may not

support the prosecution version and sections, 504, 506, 323,

420 IPC are compoundable offence, and therefore, their

compounding is permitted. As far as sections 342, 147 are

concerned, it can be seen for which the ingredients are absent.

5. Recently, the Apex Court in cases titled Rajendra Bhagat v.

State of Jharkhand & Anr., 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 34, Bitan

Sengupta v. State of West Bengal, (2018) 18 SCC 366, B.S.

Joshi v. State of Haryana, (2003) 4 SCC 675 & and this

Court in Application u/s 482 No.12174 of 2020 (Pramod and

Another vs. State of U.P. and Another) decided on 23.2.2021

and also in the resent judgement of Supreme Court in the case

of Ram Avtar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh decided

on25.10.2021 in Crl. Appeala No. 1393 of 2011 in exercise of

inherent powers vested in 226 of Constitution read with section

482 Cr.P.C. would permit this court to quash the proceeding

looking to the nature and effect of the offence on the

consciousness of the society and the seriousness of the injured

and the voluntarily nature of compromise between the parties.

The conduct of the accused prior and after occurrence of the

offence. Thus, annulment ofproceeding on the basis of

compromise simply would not be permitted except where their

are peculiar facts and circumstances, hence criminal

proceedings are quashed and set aside.

6. In our case, the respondent No. 4/informant has voluntarily

decided to settle the dispute. The complainant wish to live in

peace and therefore, the FIR is quash. The reason being she has

stated that the sale deed was executed in favour of petitioners

No. 2 and 3 without any fear and pressure, and therefore, we

quash the FIR on the facts and circumstances of the case. The

respondent No. 4 is old lady of 61 year and she does not wish to

face litigation.

7. In view of the above, this petition is allowed.

Order Date :- 20.6.2022/RPD

Digitally signed by RATAN

PRAKASH DWIVEDI

Date: 2022.06.21 17:01:38 IST

Reason:

Location: High Court of Judicature at

Allahabad