Samuel J.Kurut v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Crl.P.MP.Nos.19105 & 19106 of 2016 In/AND ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') to quash Charge sheet filed in PRC No.31 of 2015 on the file of VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyberabad, Rajendranagar.

2.

Crl.P.M.P.No.19105 of 2016 is filed seeking permission to represent the petitioner on behalf of Accused No.3 in all the matters as the accused No.3 executed Special Power of Attorney dt. 01.12.2016 in favour of petitioner.

3.

Crl.P.M.P.No.19106 of 2016 is filed to permit the petitioner to compound the offence under Section 3 (1) (x) of SCs and STs ( POA) Act, 1989.

4.

Both the parties are present-in-person and they are identified by their respective counsel and the parties also produced photostat copies of their Aadhar Cards in proof of identity. On enquiry, they informed that they settled the land dispute outside the Court and decided to live happily in future. Even if the trial is continued, the chances of supporting the prosecution case by witnesses are bleak and such trial would end in futility. 5.

Though the offences stated above are not compoundable offences, but in view of the Judgment in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab and

another1, wherein the Full Bench of Apex Court held that the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or F.I.R. or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal Court for compounding the offences. It further held that the exercise of power to quash the criminal proceedings or complaint or FIR, where the parties have settled their dispute, would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case. Before exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. It further held that heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc., could not be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim's family and the offender have settled the dispute.

Such offences are not private in nature and have serious impact on society. Similarly, any compromise between victim and offender in relation to offences under special statutes like Prevention of Corruption Act or offences committed by public servants while working in that capacity etc., could not provide for any basis for quashing criminal proceedings involving such offences.

6. In view of the settlement entered into by the parties by filing a joint memo, I deem it appropriate to grant leave to the parties to compound the offence.

7. Accordingly, Crl.P.MP.Nos.19105 and 19106 of 2016 are allowed. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, the proceedings in Charge sheet in PRC No.31 of 2015 on the file of VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Cyderabad, Rajendranagar, registered for the offence under 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

Section 3 (1) (x) of SCs and STs (POA) Act, 1989, are quashed. Accordingly, Crl.P.No.16946 of 2016 is allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J December 20, 2016.

eha

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Crl.P.MP.Nos.19105 & 19106 of 2016 In/AND Dt.20.12.2016 eha