Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 50 (GAU)

Tasar Singkom v. State of Arunachal Pradesh

2020-01-17

NANI TAGIA

body2020
JUDGMENT Nani Tagia, J. - Heard Mr. Tabit Tapak, learned counsel, appearing on behalf of the petitioners. Also heard Ms. Hage Laxmi, learned Addl. P.P., Arunachal Pradesh. 2. This criminal petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, has been filed by the petitioners, 3 in number, for quashing of G.R. Case No. 61/2008, arising out of Aalo Police Station Case No. 55/2008, u/ss. 468/471/472/34 IPC on the ground that the petitioners and the complainant, have settled their differences by a deed of settlement, dated 05.03.2019. The complainant, however, is not before this Court. 3. The aforesaid criminal proceeding arose out of an First Information Report(FIR), dated 07.07.2008, lodged by one Sri Tukar Angu, i/c Headmaster, Government Nehru Memorial School, before the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo, complaining that one Sri Vijay Rida, the petitioner No. 2, herein, had sought for admission in Class-IX of the School, named-above, by submitting a fake certificate. 4. The aforesaid First Information Report(FIR) dated 07.07.2018, was forwarded by the Deputy Commissioner, West Siang District, Aalo, to the Officer-in-Charge of Aalo Police Station and on receipt thereof, the Aalo Police Station Case No. 55/2008 u/ss. 468/471/472/473/34 IPC, was registered. On completion of the investigation, charge-sheet was laid on 30.06.2009 vide Charge Sheet No. 52/2009 against the 4 accused persons, named therein. 5. During the course of investigation, as revealed from the Charge-sheet, the petitioner No. 2 had admitted of having obtained the fake certificate from one Sri Tasar Singkom, the petitioner No. 1, herein, on payment of Rs. 1,000/- only. On the basis thereof, the petitioner No. 1 i.e. Tasar Singkom, was also arrested, who, during investigation, had revealed of having nexus with one Sri Suresh Rabha, the petitioner No. 3, herein, who, provided him with fake certificate and documents for selling it to those who requires it on payment. Various documents were also seized during the course of investigation. Accordingly, on the basis of the investigation made, Charge-Sheet No. 52/2009 u/ss. 468/471/472/473/34 IPC, was filed against the 4 accused persons, namely, Vijay Rida, Tasar Singkom, Suresh Rabha and Amal Kumar Gurung. 6. It is noticed from the order passed by the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Siang District, Aalo, dated 24.04.2019, that defence witnesses have been closed and the next date for final argument was fixed on 27.05.2019. 7. Mr. 6. It is noticed from the order passed by the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Siang District, Aalo, dated 24.04.2019, that defence witnesses have been closed and the next date for final argument was fixed on 27.05.2019. 7. Mr. Tapak, learned counsel for the petitioners, by referring to the case of Narinder Singh & ors. v. State of Punjab & anr., (2014) 6 SCC 466 , more particularly, paragraph No. 29, submits that 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, amicably. 8. Paragraph No. 29.1 to paragraph No. 29.5 of the judgment as rendered in the above-cited case, which are relevant for adjudication of this case, is quoted hereinbelow, for ready reference: wxyz "29.1. Power conferred under Section 482 of the Code is to be distinguished from the power which lies in the Court to compound the offences under Section 320 of the Code. No doubt, under Section 482 of the Code, the High Court has inherent power to quash the criminal proceedings even in those cases which are not compoundable, where the parties have settled the matter between themselves. However, this power is to be exercised sparingly and with caution. zyxw wxyz 29.2. When the parties have reached the settlement and on that basis, petition for quashing the criminal proceedings is filed, the guiding factor in such cases would be to secure: zyxw wxyz (i) ends of justice, or zyxw wxyz (ii) to prevent the abuse of the process of any court. zyxw wxyz While exercising the power, the High Court is to form an opinion on either of the aforesaid two objectives. zyxw wxyz 29.3. Such a power is not 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 the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by the public servants while working in that capacity, are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. zyxw wxyz 29.4. Similarly, for the offences alleged to have been committed under special statute like the Prevention of Corruption Act or the offences committed by the public servants while working in that capacity, are not to be quashed merely on the basis of compromise between the victim and the offender. zyxw wxyz 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. zyxw wxyz 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." zyxw 9. From perusal of paragraph No. 29.1 to paragraph No. 29.5 of Narinder Singh & ors.(supra), it is noticed that power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for quashing of an offence which have not been mentioned u/s. 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, needs to exercised when the parties have reached the settlement only for the purpose of securing the ends of justice and to prevent the abuse of the process of the Court. 10. While exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, for the twin object and purpose mentioned hereinabove, this Court is to examine as to whether the possibility of conviction of the accused is remote and bleak and continuance of criminal cases would put the accused to great oppressionand prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal cases. Such a power isnot to be exercised in those prosecutions which involves heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc.. 11. On the other hand, only 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 disputes amicably. 12. In the instant case, it is noticed that the petitioners No. 1, 2 & 3, have been accused of committing forgery. 12. In the instant case, it is noticed that the petitioners No. 1, 2 & 3, have been accused of committing forgery. It may also be noted herein that there are 4 accused persons who have been charge-sheeted and the trial is going on in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, West Siang District, Aalo, which is on the verge of completion viz. date has been fixed for final argument. 13. The accused/petitioner No. 4 is not before this Court. Only 3 of the accused have approached this Court. 14. Be that as it may, offence of forgery against which the accused/ petitioners, herein, have been charged cannot, by any stretch of interpretation, can be said to be an offence which is relatable to civil in character arising out of commercial transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes. 15. In that view of the matter, the ratio of Narinder Singh & ors.(supra), which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner, would not apply in the present case. In addition thereto, it is also noted that the stage of the proceeding before the learned Court below is for final argument. 16. In the case cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner, namely, Narinder Singh & ors.(supra), the Hon''ble Apex Court at paragraph No. 29.7 also held that 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 charged havebeen committed or not. 17. For the reasons and discussions made hereinabove, this criminal petition has no merit and the same is dismissed being devoid of merit. 18. Interim order dated 22.05.2019 and the subsequent extensions thereof, if any, stands vacated.