Gopal Sharma, aged about 38 years, son of Jay Prakash Sharma, Resident of Kenduadih v. 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jay Niwas Pandey, son of Yamuna Pandey, resident
Case Details
With Cr. M.P. No.847 of 2022 Cr. M.P. No.615 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr.M.P. No.615 of 2022 ------ Gopal Sharma, aged about 38 years, son of Jay Prakash Sharma, Resident of Kenduadih, P.O. and P.S. – Kenduadih, District – Dhanbad. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jay Niwas Pandey, son of Yamuna Pandey, resident of Flat No. 5, Pancham Talla, Ambe Villa 02, HE School, Hirapur, P.O. and P.S. – Opposite Parties Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad … With Cr.M.P. No.847 of 2022 ------
Legal Reasoning
Manoj Kumar Singhal, aged about 46 years, son of Sri Ram Kumar Singhal, Resident of Howrah Motor, Joraphatak Road, P.O. and P.S. – Bank More, District – Dhanbad. … Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand 2. Jay Niwas Pandey, son of Yamuna Pandey, resident of Flat No. 5, Pancham Talla, Ambe Villa 02, HE School, Hirapur, P.O. and P.S. – Opposite Parties Dhanbad, District- Dhanbad … ------ For the Petitioners : Mrs. Jasvindar Mazumdar, Advocate For the State : Mr. Vineet Kr. Vashistha, Spl. P.P. (In Cr.M.P. No.615 of 2022) Ms. Vandana Singh, Addl.P.P. (In Cr.M.P. No.615 of 2022) For the O.P. No.2 : Mr. Rakesh Kr. Sinha, Advocate ------ P R E S E N T HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY By the Court:- Heard the parties. 1 With Cr. M.P. No.847 of 2022 Cr. M.P. No.615 of 2022 2. These Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions have been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.380 of 2021 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420, 406, 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 jointly draw the attention of this Court towards the Interlocutory Application No.3472 of 2023 filed in Cr.M.P. No.615 of 2022 and Interlocutory Application No.3445 of 2023 filed in Cr.M.P. No.847 of 2022 and submit that the parties have compromised their dispute. Learned counsel for the petitioners next submits that the dispute is basically commercial in nature and since compromise has taken place between the parties, hence, the continuation of this criminal proceeding in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions will amount to abuse of process of the court. It is next submitted that the both the interlocutory applications are supported by affidavit of both the petitioner and opposite party No.2 in respective cases. Hence, it is submitted that the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.380 of 2021, as prayed for by the petitioners in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions be quashed and set aside. 4. Having heard the rival submissions made at the Bar and after carefully going through the materials available in the record, it is pertinent to mention here that the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab & Another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 summed up and laid down the principles by which the High Court would be guided in 2 With Cr. M.P. No.847 of 2022 Cr. M.P. No.615 of 2022 giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings by observing thus in paragraph-29. which reads as under:- “29. In view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the High Court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings: 29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution. in 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: (i) ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. While exercising the power the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. 29.3. Such a power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. 29.4. On the other hand, those criminal cases having overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves. 29.5. While exercising its powers, the High Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal cases would put the accused to great 3 With Cr. M.P. No.847 of 2022 Cr. M.P. No.615 of 2022 oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases. 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 for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to proving the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. Medical report in respect of injuries suffered by the victim can generally be the guiding factor. On the basis of this prima facie analysis, the High Court can examine as to whether there is a strong possibility of conviction or the chances of conviction are remote and bleak. In the former case it can refuse to accept the settlement and quash the criminal proceedings whereas in the latter case it would be permissible for the High Court to accept the plea compounding the offence based on complete settlement between the parties. At this stage, the Court can also be swayed by the fact that the settlement between the parties is going to result in harmony between them which may improve their future relationship. but after in exercising 29.7. While deciding whether to exercise its power under Section 482 of the Code or not, timings of settlement play a crucial role. Those cases where the settlement is arrived at immediately after the alleged commission of offence and the matter is still under investigation, the High Court may be liberal in accepting the settlement to quash the criminal proceedings/investigation. It is because of the reason that at this stage the investigation is still on and even the charge-sheet has not been filed. Likewise, those cases where the charge is framed but the evidence is yet to start or the evidence is still at infancy stage, the its powers High Court can show benevolence favourably, the circumstances/material mentioned above. On the other hand, where the prosecution evidence is almost complete or after the conclusion of the evidence the matter is at the stage of argument, normally the High Court should refrain from exercising its power under Section 482 of the Code, as in such cases the trial court would be in a position to decide the case finally on merits and to come to a conclusion as to whether the offence under Section 307 IPC is committed or not. Similarly, in those cases where the conviction is already recorded by the trial court and the matter is at the appellate stage before the High Court, mere compromise between the parties would not be a ground to accept the same resulting in acquittal of the offender who has already been convicted by the trial court. Here charge is proved under Section 307 IPC and conviction is already recorded of a heinous assessment prima facie of 4 With Cr. M.P. No.847 of 2022 Cr. M.P. No.615 of 2022 crime and, therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty of such a crime.” (Emphasis supplied) 5. After going through the materials available in the record, this Court is satisfied that since the parties have compromised their dispute which is basically a dispute of civil nature and the case is at the stage of investigation, hence, the continuation of criminal proceeding even after full settlement between the parties will amount to abuse of process of the court, as in view of the settlement between the parties; chances of conviction of the petitioner is bleak. Hence, in the interest of justice, this Court is of the considered view that these are fit cases where the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.380 of 2021, as prayed for by the petitioners in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions be quashed. 6. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceeding including the First Information Report in connection with Dhanbad P.S. Case No.380 of 2021, as prayed for by the petitioners in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions is quashed and set aside. 7. 8.
Decision
In the result, both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions stand allowed. Interim order, if any, in both these Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions stand vacated. (Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.) High Court of Jharkhand, Ranchi Dated the 12th of April, 2023 AFR/ Animesh 5