Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 94 (RAJ)

Siyaram S/o Hariyaram v. State of Rajasthan

2025-01-13

ASHUTOSH KUMAR

body2025
ORDER : 1. This petition has been filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023 for quashing of criminal proceedings pending in Criminal Appeal No. 10/2023 (Siyaram and Ors. vs. State) before the court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 2. As per the facts narrated by the counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners were convicted and sentenced by the learned ACJM, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar in regular criminial case no. 23/369/17 vide judgment dated 20.10.2023 for the offence punishable under Sections 147, 148, 323/149, 341, 324/149 and 326 read with 149 IPC. The maximum sentence awarded against the petitioners was 03 years. 3. The petitioners aggrieved by the judgment dated 20.10.2023, preferred a criminal appeal in the court of ADJ, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar which is pending. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that during the pendency of appeal, injured-complainant and the petitioners jointly submitted a compromise-deed before the Appellate Court, and the Appellate Court has attested the compromise for the offence under Sections 323, 341, 149 IPC but has declined to attest the compromise for the offence under Sections 147, 148, 324 and 326/149 IPC being non-compoundable. The said appeal against the petitioners is pending for non-compoundable cases. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioners at last argues that this matter is fully covered by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr., 2012 Cri. LJ (SC) 4934 and in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Choudhary Bhajan Lal and Ors. , AIR 1992 SC 604 . Learned counsel also argues that since the parties have settled the dispute and arrived at compromise, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served, if the criminal case in the form of appeal is allowed to continue, hence the criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners may be quashed. Certified copies of the compromise-deed, and order passed by the learned Appellate Court attesting the compromise, have been annexed with the petition. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-injured does not dispute the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties, and submits that the complainant has no objection if the criminal proceedings in appeal No. 10/2023 pending before ADJ, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar are quashed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant-injured does not dispute the factum of compromise arrived at between the parties, and submits that the complainant has no objection if the criminal proceedings in appeal No. 10/2023 pending before ADJ, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar are quashed. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 8. Recently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal & Anr. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (Cr. Appeal No. 1489/2012) decided on 29.9.2021, considering the question whether High Court in exercise of its powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. could quash non-compoundable offences, based on a compromise/ settlement arrived at between the accused and the victim-complainant, held as under: "19. We thus sumup and hold that as opposed to Section 320 Cr.P.C. where the Court is squarely guided by the compromise between the parties in respect of offences ‘compoundable’ within the statutory framework, the extraordinary power enjoined upon a High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, can be invoked beyond the metes and bounds of Section 320 Cr.P.C. Nonetheless, we reiterate that such powers of wide amplitude ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind: (i) Nature and effect of the offence on the conscious of the society; (ii) Seriousness of the injury, if any; (iii) Voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim; & (iv) Conduct of the accused persons, prior to and after the occurrence of the purported offence and/or other relevant considerations. 20. Having appraised the aforestated parameters and weighing upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of the two appeals before us, we are inclined to invoke powers under Article 142 and quash the criminal proceedings and consequently set aside the conviction in both the appeals. 20. Having appraised the aforestated parameters and weighing upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of the two appeals before us, we are inclined to invoke powers under Article 142 and quash the criminal proceedings and consequently set aside the conviction in both the appeals. We say so for the reasons that: Firstly, the occurrence(s) involved in these appeals can be categorized as purely personal or having overtones of criminal proceedings of private nature; Secondly, the nature of injuries incurred, for which the Appellants have been convicted, do not appear to exhibit their mental depravity or commission of an offence of such a serious nature that quashing of which would override public interest; Thirdly, given the nature of the offence and injuries, it is immaterial that the trial against the Appellants had been concluded or their appeal(s) against conviction stand dismissed; Fourthly, the parties on their own volition, without any coercion or compulsion, willingly and voluntarily have buried their differences and wish to accord a quietus to their dispute(s); Fifthly, the occurrence(s) in both the cases took place way back in the years 2000 and 1995, respectively. There is nothing on record to evince that either before or after the purported compromise, any untoward incident transpired between the parties; Sixthly, since the Appellants and the complainant(s) are residents of the same village(s) and/or work in close vicinity, the quashing of criminal proceedings will advance peace, harmony, and fellowship amongst the parties who have decided to forget and forgive any illwill and have no vengeance against each other; and Seventhly, the cause of administration of criminal justice system would remain un- effected on acceptance of the amicable settlement between the parties and/or resultant acquittal of the Appellants; more so looking at their present age. 21. Consequently, and for the reasons stated above, read with the settlement dated 13th September 2006, we find it appropriate to invoke our powers under Article 142 of the Constitution and quash the criminal proceedings in the aforesaid case. As a sequel thereto, all offences emanating out of the FIR leading to Criminal Appeal No. 1489 of 2012 stand annulled, and the judgment and orders passed by the trial court, appellate court and the High Court are set aside. Resultantly, the Appellants shall be deemed to have been acquitted of the charged offences for all intents and purposes." 9. As a sequel thereto, all offences emanating out of the FIR leading to Criminal Appeal No. 1489 of 2012 stand annulled, and the judgment and orders passed by the trial court, appellate court and the High Court are set aside. Resultantly, the Appellants shall be deemed to have been acquitted of the charged offences for all intents and purposes." 9. In view of the aforesaid and considering the fact that the parties have resolved their disputes amicably and also considering that the present case is wholly covered by the principle of law laid down by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh (supra) and in the case of Bhajan Lal (supra), the criminal proceedings in appeal No. 10/2023 are liable to be quashed in view of compromise arrived at between the parties although the offences are non-compoundable. 10. In the light of the aforesaid judicial precedents, this Court is of the opinion that no fruitful purpose would be served in continuation of the criminal proceedings against the petitioners because the parties have entered into a compromise and, therefore, the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 20.10.2023 passed by learned ACJM, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar is quashed on the basis of compromise, and the proceedings pending in appeal no. 10/2023 against the petitioners before the learned ADJ, Laxmangarh, Distt. Alwar are also quashed. Consequence to follow. 11. Accordingly, the criminal misc. petition is allowed. The stay petition also stands disposed of.