Shiv Prakash Tiwari Alias Bulbul and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 90 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42929 of 2023 Applicant :- Shiv Prakash Tiwari Alias Bulbul And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ras Bihari Pandey,Ram Krishna Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arunendra Kumar Shukla,Pawan Kumar Shukla,Raghavendra Kumar Tiwari Hon'ble Dinesh Pathak,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for respondent no.2 and the learned A.G.A.

¶2The applicants have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the entire proceeding on the basis of compromise between the parties of Criminal Case No.1804 of 2020 (State vs. Shiv Prakash Tiwari & Others) arising out of Case Crime No.0033 of 2020 under Section 323, 504, 506 and 308 I.P.C., Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur.

¶3Respondent no. 2 has lodged an F.I.R., being Case Crime No.0033 of 2020, levelling allegations of thrashing and criminal intimidation. After investigation, Section 308 has been added. During pendency of the criminal proceeding, both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and approached before this Court by way of invoking inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being Application No.5169 of 2022. Said application was finally disposed of, vide order dated 08.03.2022, directing the parties concerned to approach the Mediation Centre of the District Court and they have been granted liberty to approach before this Court again along with the final outcome of the mediation, in case, it is decided in positive. For ready reference order dated

08.03.2022 is quoted herein below :- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1804 of 2020 (STate Vs. Shiv Prakash Tiwari and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 33 of 2020 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C. Police Station Vindhyachal, District Mirzapur, pending before learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mirzapur as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 04.05.2020 and also to quash the cognizance order 14.09.2020 passed in the aforesaid case. The contentions raised by the applicants' counsel is that there is a dispute in between the parties. There are chances of amicable settlement between the parties. Applicants' counsel urged that this case may be referred for mediation so that the parties may have a chance to settle their dispute on their own terms through mediation. In such circumstances, it is directed that both the parties shall appear before the court below and file an application for settling the dispute through mediation. In case such an application is filed before the court below for settling the dispute through mediation, the court concerned shall pass an appropriate order within a week from the date of filing such an application. The mediation centre will decide the same within a period of four months. For a period of four months, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the above mentioned case. It is further directed that in case mediation process between the parties fails, the court below shall be free to proceed further with the matter against the applicants and in case mediation succeeds, the applicants shall be free to approach this Court. With the above observation, this application is disposed of."

¶4In pursuance of the order dated 08.03.2022, both the parties have appeared before the court below and filed their settlement agreement dated 15.02.2023 (Annexure 7 to this application). Considering the said settlement agreement dated 15.02.2023, Mediation Centre of district Mirzapur has submitted its report on the same day i.e. 15.02.2023 showing the successful mediation process between the parties. Certified copy of the mediation report dated 15.02.2023 is filed as Annexure-5 to the instant application.

¶5It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in the above eventuality of amicable settlement took place between the parties and the report dated 15.02.2023 submitted by the Mediation Centre of district Mirzapur, instant application may be allowed and the entire proceedings may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have entered into compromise out of their own volition without any duress and burried the hatchet. There is no grudges between them against each other. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court:- (i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675. (ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667. (iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1. (iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. (v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶6In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below :- "15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court; (ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable. (iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power; (iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; (v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated; (vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences; (vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned; (viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute; (ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and (x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanor. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

¶7Learned A.G.A. has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the court concerned.

¶8Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has nodded the factum of the compromise entered into between the parties and he has no objection, if the instant application is decided finally on the basis of the said compromise. He also submits that compromise was verified in presence of both the parties, who have voluntarily entered into compromise and opposite party no. 2 does not wants to prosecute the present case against the applicant any more as no dispute remains between the parties.

¶9Having considered the settlement agreement/mediation report dated 15.02.2023 and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.

¶10In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the settlement/agreement inked between the parties, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

¶11Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action. Order Date :- 23.11.2023 VR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad