B.S. Bhaskar v. Rajpal Singh), under Section
Case Details
Court No. - 53 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2197 of 2022 Applicant :- Rajpal Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bal Krishna Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pravesh Kumar,Rahul Milind Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Legal Reasoning
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash/ set aside the entire proceeding, including summoning order dated 16.11.2021, of Complaint Case No.743 of 202 (B.S. Bhaskar vs. Rajpal Singh), under Section 420, 406 I.P.C., P.S. Kottwali Nagar, District Buland Shahar, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/ Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Buland Shahar. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that:- (i) the dispute between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2 is purely private and civil in nature; (ii) the complaint has been filed by opposite party no. 2 on 8.1.2021 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged; (iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicant nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred; (iv) there is no injury caused to any party and wholly exaggerated allegations had been made in the heat of the moment owing to estranged relationship and bruised egos; (v) therefore, in such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the present applicant. In compliance with the order of this Court dated 8.2.2022, the matter was referred to Mediation Centre of this Court. The report of Mediation Centre has been annexed in connected Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 19688 of 2022. As per report of the Mediation Centre dated 29.6.2022 the parties have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them. The relevant portion of the report is extracted hereinbelow: "6. The following settlement has been arrived at between the Parties hereto:- (g) That Shri Raj Pal Singh (Applicant) and Shri B.S. Bhaskar (O.P. No.2) have decided to resolve their dispute on the condition that Shri Rajpal Singh (Applicant) shall pay an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs.Two Lakh Twenty Thousand Only) to Shri B.S. Bhaskar (O.P. No.2). (a) That for the aforesaid purpose today i.e. 29.6.2022, the amount of Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs.Two Lakh twenty Thousand Only) handed over to Shri B.S. Bhaskar (O.P. No.2) by Shri Rajpal Singh (applicant) through demand draft bearing no.015896 dated 27.6.2022 drawn on Punjab National Bank issued in the name of VS Bhaskar (O.P. No. 2), and O.P. No.2 has acknowledged the receipt of the same. After the payment of the aforesaid amount of Rs.2,20,000/- (Rs. Two Lakh Twenty Thousand Only) to Shri B.S. Bhaskar (O.P. No.2), nothing shall due remain against Shri Rajpal Singh (Applicant). (b) That the complaint case no. 157 of 2021 (old case no. 7666 of 2020), B.S. Bhaskar Vs. Rajpal, under Section 138 N.I. Act, P.S. Kotwali Nagar, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior, D.J./ Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Bulandshahr. (c) That it has also been agreed between the parties that apart from the cases mentioned above, if any civil or criminal case is pending between the parties against each other regarding present dispute shall also be withdrawn by the parties concerned as soon as possible in view of this settlement-agreement. (d) That it has also been agreed between the parties that they will not file any case/ complaint against each other regarding the present dispute in future also. (e) That it has been agreed between the parties that they shall not violate the terms and conditions of this settlement-agreement, otherwise the aggrieved party will be free to take legal recourse. 7. By signing this Agreement the Parties hereto state that the Application u/s 482 No. 2197 of 2022 and all disputes and differences in this regard have been amicably settled by the Parties hereto the process of Conciliation/Mediation." The opposite party no. 2 had also appeared before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court below and was identified by his counsel. He has not filed any affidavit in the present case disputing the aforesaid facts. In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab, reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand, reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that if the criminal prosecution is allowed to proceed, it may create further complication between the parties. From a perusal of the record, it appears, the real dispute between the parties were civil and private in nature and criminal prosecution arose incidentally and not as a natural consequence of the real occurrence. It is further apparent that the parties have entered into a compromise and they further appear to have settled their aforesaid real disputes amicably. The court cannot remain oblivious to the hard reality that the facts of the present case and other similar cases present where, though the allegations made in the complaint do appear to contain the ingredients of a criminal offence, however, in view of settlement having been reached, the chances of conviction are not only bleak but, if such proceedings are allowed to continue along with all other cases that lie piled up in practically all criminal courts in the state, the continuance of proceedings in cases such as the instant case may only work to the huge disadvantage of other cases where litigants are crying for justice. In normal circumstances, the court would be loathe to accept some of such compromise arrangements. However, that course does not commend to the court in view of the high pendency of criminal cases and the high propensity to lie and state falsehood that appears to be otherwise rampant in the society - where desire to take revenge appears to sometime over shadow the pure pursuit of justice; where winning a legal battle matters more than doing the right thing; where teaching lesson to one's adversary often appears to be the only purpose of instituting a criminal proceeding. Thus, looking at the prevalent tendencies in the society, a more pragmatic, and less technical approach commends to the court - to let some criminal prosecutions such as the present case be dropped, for the sake of more effective, efficient and proper trial in other cases where the litigants appear to be serious about their rights and more consistent in their approach. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties and taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application thus may be allowed, subject however to payment of cost to be deposited by the parties before the High Court Legal Services Committee, Allahabad, within a period of six weeks from today. Such cost has to be imposed to let the parties (in this case) in particular and the society in general know that the courts cannot remain a mute spectator to unscrupulous and errant behaviour of its members. A society that will allow its members to misuse its courts, will ultimately suffer and pay a huge cost. Litigants, both genuine and bogus, will always continue to stand in a common queue. The courts have no mechanism to pre-identify and distinguish between the genuine and the bogus litigants. That differentiation emerges only after the hearing is concluded in any case, hearing requires time. In fact, even if the courts were to take punitive action against a bogus litigant, then, being bound by rules of procedure and fairness, such cases are likely to require more time to be devoted to them than a case of two genuine litigants. In such circumstances, though no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any further, however, no firm conclusion may be reached, at this stage, as to complete falsity of the allegations made against the applicant. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application thus stands allowed, subject to payment of cost Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited before the High Court Legal Services Committee, Allahabad, within a period of six weeks from today. The Legal Services Committee exists and works for the benefit of those litigants for whom court procedures are difficult to afford. It provides a crucial and essential service to the society itself. It thus appears proper to direct payment of the amount of cost to the Legal Services Committee, as a reminder and warning to the society and its members to introspect and reflect at their actions and deeds and also at the consequences that follow. Order Date :- 30.11.2022 S.S. Digitally signed by SIDDHARTH SRIVASTAVA Date: 2022.12.08 17:16:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad