Syed Aswak Ahmeed , Syed Ashfaq Ahmed v. The State Of Telangana

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Crl.P.MP.Nos.19302 & 19303 of 2016 In/AND Crl.P.No.17145 of 2016 ORDER:

This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.') to quash the proceedings in Crime No.153 of 2016 on the file of Madannapet at Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A and 354 IPC. 2.

Crl.P.M.P.No.19302 and 19393 of 2016 are filed to permit the petitioner to compound the aforesaid offences and to record the compromise entered by the parties and to quash the proceedings in the aforesaid crime. 3.

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 dispute at the intervention of elders and now they are living together in pursuance of the compromise. Even if the trial is continued, the chances of supporting the prosecution case by witnesses are bleak and such trial would end in futility.

4.

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 1 (2012) 10 SCC 303

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.

5. 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 offences.

6. Accordingly, Crl.P.MP.Nos.19302 and 19303 of 2016 are allowed. In view of the orders passed in the aforesaid petitions, the proceedings in Crime NO.153 of 2016 on the file of Madannapet at Hyderabad, registered for the offences under Sections 498-A and 354 IPC, are quashed. Accordingly, Crl.P.No.17145 of 2016 is allowed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Petition, shall stand closed.

__________________________________ M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY, J December 28, 2016.

eha

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. SATYANARAYANA MURTHY Crl.P.MP.Nos.19302 & 19303 of 2016 In/AND Crl.P.No.17145 of 2016 Dt.28.12.2016 eha