Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2021 DIGILAW 89 (UTT)

PRANJAL PATHAK v. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

2021-01-28

SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA

body2021
JUDGMENT Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J. (Oral) The applicants who are accused for commission of the offences under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323 and 506 of IPC, had prayed for the quashing of the First Information Report No.119 of 2017, which was registered against them at Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. 2. Today, the matter is listed, on a Compounding Application no.2100 of 2019, as has been preferred by the parties to the criminal miscellaneous application as well of the writ petition, duly signed by them, as well as by their respective Counsels, including also of filing of their respective affidavits, filed in support of the compounding application. 3. The parties to the present criminal miscellaneous application i.e. applicant no.1 and respondent nos.2 and 3 are present in person, before this Court. Petitioner nos.2 and 3 have joined the court proceedings, through video conferencing, who are duly identified by their respective Lawyers. 4. The parties to the present criminal miscellaneous application have categorically made a statement before this Court, that a better sense has prevailed between them and subsequently they have voluntarily compounded their offences and they have entered into a settlement and in support thereto, they have filed a compounding application being CRMA No.2100 of 2019, by invoking the provisions contained under Section 320 of the CrPC, seeking composition of the offences, which was registered by way of the First Information Report No.119 of 2017 “State Vs. Pranjal Pathak and others", for the commission, of the offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323 and 506 of IPC, which was registered at Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital. 5. The present C482 Application has been filed along with the compounding application itself contending that the complainant does not want to prosecute the accused persons/applicants anymore. 6. The said compounding application was strongly objected by the learned State Counsel, on the two pretexts that (a) the medical report supports the prosecution story about the commission of the offences (b) some of the offences of the complaint are not compoundable. 7. This Court is of the view that in view of the pronouncements laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as by this Court in the case of Pan Singh Rana Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others reported in 2018 (2) UD, 680, even the offence under Section 307 of IPC, therein also has been compounded. 8. 7. This Court is of the view that in view of the pronouncements laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court as well as by this Court in the case of Pan Singh Rana Vs. State of Uttarakhand and others reported in 2018 (2) UD, 680, even the offence under Section 307 of IPC, therein also has been compounded. 8. The logic behind the composition of the offence is that if the prosecution or the complainant himself does not want to prosecute the accused persons and then too still forcing upon the accused persons to face the trial, it will be a futile effort as the ultimate culmination of the trial would be nothing but a futility of the exercise of judicial proceedings. 9. In that view of the matter, the compounding application is allowed. The First Information Report being FIR No.119 of 2017 under Sections 147, 148, 307, 323 and 506 of IPC, registered against the applicants at Police Station Ramnagar, District Nainital is hereby quashed. 10. The Criminal Miscellaneous Application stands disposed of accordingly.