Are you looking for a legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.

Manoj Kumar And Ors v. State Of H.p

Manoj Kumar And Ors v. State Of H.p

(High Court Of Himachal Pradesh)

CRIMINAL Misc. Petition (Main) U/S 482 CRPC No. 449 of 2019 | 29-10-2021

1. By way of this petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a prayer has been made for quashing of FIR No. 110, dated 04.08.2017 and criminal proceedings ensuing therefrom, inter alia, on the ground that the matter has been compromised between the accused-petitioner and the complainant.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as learned Additional Advocate General.

3. A perusal of the record demonstrates that there are more than one accused in the FIR in issue. After completion of investigation, the investigation report was filed by the Investigating Agency before the learned Trial Court and pursuant thereto, as learned Trial Court found a prima facie case therein, charges were framed against the accused. Not only this, thereafter the process was undertaken by the learned Trial Court to proceed with the trial of the matter and as of now, the case is fixed for hearing. Now, it is on the basis of a compromise which has been entered into by the complainant with one of the accused, who in turn thereof, has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

4. This Court is of the considered view that the inherent powers, which stand conferred upon this Court under Section 482 of the Court of Criminal Procedure, cannot be exercised at the throw of the hat by the Court, simply because someone approaches the Court with the plea that the matter has been compromised between the parties. It is settled law that Criminal offence is not an offence against an individual, but against the State. It is for this reason that the State prosecutes the accused and not an individual. Here it is a typical case, wherein after lodging of the FIR, the investigation took place. After completion of the investigation, the challan was filed. Thereafter, the prosecution produced its witnesses in the Court and now the case is fixed for hearing. Lot of judicial time has been consumed in this entire process and now the accused-petitioner wants this Court to quash the FIR, simply on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the complainant. This Court has serious doubt about the credentials of the complainant also, who has entered into this exercise of partial compromise with one of the accused in the FIR concerned. It speaks volume about the conduct of the complainant also. However, without going into this aspect of the matter, as this Court has already observed hereinabove that the inherent powers so conferred upon this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure cannot be exercised by it at the throw of the hat, on the contention of an accused that the matter has been amicably settled, therefore, without further commenting on the issue, this petition is dismissed.

Advocate List

  • SHRI NAVEEN KUMAR BHARDWAJ, ADVOCATE

  • SHRI ASHOK SHARMA, ADVOCATE GENERAL, WITH M/S ADARSH SHARMA & SANJEEV SOOD, ADDITIONAL ADVOCATE GENERALS

Bench
  • HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY MOHAN GOEL
Eq Citations
  • LQ
  • LQ/HimHC/2021/852
Head Note

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 482 — Quashing of FIR/criminal proceedings — Invocation of inherent powers — Compromise between accused-petitioner and complainant — Held, inherent powers cannot be exercised at the throw of the hat, simply because someone approaches the Court with the plea that the matter has been compromised between the parties — Criminal offence is not an offence against an individual, but against the State — It is for this reason that the State prosecutes the accused and not an individual — Here it is a typical case, wherein after lodging of the FIR, the investigation took place — After completion of the investigation, the challan was filed — Thereafter, the prosecution produced its witnesses in the Court and now the case is fixed for hearing — Lot of judicial time has been consumed in this entire process and now the accused-petitioner wants the FIR to be quashed, simply on the ground that the matter has been amicably settled between him and the complainant — The Court has serious doubt about the credentials of the complainant also, who has entered into this exercise of partial compromise with one of the accused in the FIR concerned — It speaks volume about the conduct of the complainant also — However, without going into this aspect of the matter, as the Court has already observed that the inherent powers cannot be exercised by it at the throw of the hat, on the contention of an accused that the matter has been amicably settled, therefore, without further commenting on the issue, the petition is dismissed — Criminal Law — Compromise