Rakesh Kumar Pal v. State Of Uttarakhand and Another

Mr. Sanjay Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. Vipul Painuli, learned A.G.A. for the State of Uttarakhand/respondent No.1. Mr. Nikhil Khuswaha, respondent No.2. learned counsel Hon’ble Pankaj Purohit, J. (Oral) Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. By means of the present C528 application, the applicant has put to challenge the FIR No.199 of 2015 dated 24.07.2015, Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2015 registered with P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, cognizance/summoning order dated 29.10.2015 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3271 of 2015 State Vs. Rakesh Kumar Pal, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar.

3. Along with the present C528 application, a joint compounding application (IA/1/2025) is filed duly supported by separate affidavits by applicant and respondent No.2. 1

4. In the compounding application, it has been stated by the parties that the disputes between them are settled and the decree of divorce has been affirmed by a Division Bench of this Court on the basis of the settlement arrived at between them on certain terms and conditions vide order dated 29.08.2024. Now, the respondent No.2 does not want to pursue with the case anymore.

5. Applicant-Rakesh Kumar Pal is present before this Court through V.C. while respondent No.2-Anshu Singh is present before this Court physically, who are duly identified by their respective counsel. On interaction, respondent No.2 categorically stated the dispute is now amicably settled by them and the decree of divorce has also been affirmed on certain terms and conditions, therefore, she wants to end the matter with her free will and does not want to prosecute the applicant in the aforesaid matter any further.

6. Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that some of the offences sought to be compounded are non-compoundable.

7. So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: - “If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.”

8. Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint, and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or 2 affect the powers under Section 528 of the B.N.S.S.,

9. Learned counsel for the parties also drew the attention of this Court towards the ruling of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and another, (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 160, in which Hon’ble Supreme Court observed as below: “The position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz; (i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any Court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or F.I.R may be exercised where the offender and victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. ………………… In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim. In other words, the High Court must consider whether it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and wrongdoer and whether to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that criminal case is put to an end and if the answer to the above question(s) is in affirmative, the High Court shall be well within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceeding.”

10. Since the parties have reached to the terms of the compromise, this Court is of the firm opinion that there would remain a remote or bleak possibility of conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to permit continuation of the criminal proceedings. Since the answer to the aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

11. Accordingly, compounding application (IA/1/ 2025) is allowed. 3

12. In view of the above, the present C528 application is allowed in terms of the compromise. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.3271 of 2015 State Vs. Rakesh Kumar Pal, for the offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and under Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, pending before the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, is hereby quashed. Resultantly, FIR No.199 of 2015 dated 24.07.2015 and Charge Sheet dated 29.09.2015 registered with P.S. Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar, stand quashed.

13. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. PN PREETI NEGI DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=63c75a8c4765581180a58d7478fadbe 38331bac55c78b5f9f0276c16432f6aab, postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=2BA53171893B3C3CB3CCCAE8 1FAE064498483A83D84BDB0F9229D5BF08D9 59AC, cn=PREETI NEGI (Pankaj Purohit, J.) 06.08.2025 4