The High Court
Case Details
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK CRLMC No.3411 of 2024 Kanhu Charan Gouda and others …. Petitioner(s) Mr. B. Mohanty, Advocate -versus- State of Odisha and others …. Opposite Party(s)
Legal Reasoning
Mr. U. R. Jena, AGA CORAM: JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA Order No. 04. 1. 2.
Decision
ORDER 07.02.2025 Heard. The petitioners are the accused in the F.I.R. dated 23.08.2018 in Bhanjanagar P.S. Case No.285 of 2018 for the alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 294/341/342/323/307/506/34 of I.P.C. read with Section 25(1- B)(a)/27 of the Arms Act, 1959. 2. The allegation against the petitioners are that on 23.08.2018, the informant being opposite party No.3 lodged a written report before the I.I.C., Bhanjanagar P.S. alleging therein that near Badakadanda bridge, the petitioner No.1 along with five others were kidnapped his son with an intention to kill him but later he escaped from them. Hence, the F.I.R. Page 1 of 6 3. On the ground that the petitioners have entered into a settlement with the informant and the victim, the present petition has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal prosecution initiated against the petitioners. 4. Mr. Jena, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State submits that the petitioners have criminal antecedents and the details of cases registered against them are furnished as under:- <Verified the C/A of the following accused person namely 1. Kanhu Gouda and found he is involved in following cases:- 1. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.155 Dtd. 25.06.2015 U/S 147/148/294/307/323/341/379 IPC. 2. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.120 Dtd. 02.04.2017 U/S 147/148/294/307/323/341/379 IPC. 3. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.171 Dtd. 18.06.2017 U/S 147/148/294/307/323/341/379 IPC. Verified the C/A accused Ashok Gouda and found he is involved in following cases:- 1. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.155 Dtd. 25.06.2015 U/S 147/148/294/307/323/341/379 IPC. 2. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.26/2015 U/S 294/323/427/506/34 IPC. 3. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.214/2015 U/S 307/34 IPC/25 Arms Act. Verified the C/A accused Muna Pradhan and found he is involved in following cases:- Page 2 of 6 1. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.05 Dtd 2013 U/S 341/506/307/34 b IPC. 2. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.73/2014 U/S 294/323/506 IPC/3 Sc/ST Act. 3. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.160/14 U/S 399/402 IPC/25 Arms Act. Verified the C/A accused Kalia @ Srikant Bhuyan and found he is involved in following cases:- 1. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.136 Dtd. 01.07.2011 U/S 186/294/323/341/353/506/34 IPC. 2. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.142/2011 U/S 379/427 IPC. 3. Bhanjanagar P.S. case No.56/2012 U/S 392 IPC. Verified the C/A accused Bagha @ Basanta Bisoyi and found he is not involved in any case at Bhanjanagar P.S.= 5. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of The State of Madhya Pradesh vrs. Laxmi Narayan and Ors. reported in AIR 2019 SC 1296 has held that the High Court while exercising the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be circumspective and guarded in the cases of heinous nature. The Court while dealing with an offence under Section 307 of I.P.C. for quashing has held as under:- “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 Page 3 of 6 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 oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases. 29.6. Offences Under Section 307 Indian Penal Code 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 Indian Penal Code 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 Indian Penal Code 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 Indian Penal Code. 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/delegate 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 Page 4 of 6 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. 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 High Court can show benevolence in exercising its powers favourably, but after prima facie assessment of 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 Indian Penal Code 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 Indian Penal Code and conviction is already recorded of a heinous crime and, therefore, there is no question of sparing a convict found guilty of such a crime.= 6. Regard being had to the gravamen of the offences, antecedents of the petitioners and in view of the settled position of Page 5 of 6 law, I am not inclined to entertain the petition and quash the F.I.R. and the consequential proceedings arising therefrom. 7. Accordingly, the CRLMC is dismissed. (S.S. Mishra) Judge Swarna Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed Signed by: SWARNAPRAVA DASH Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 07-Feb-2025 17:02:41 Page 6 of 6