Ghulam Qadir Sheikh & Ors vs UT Of J&K

Sanjay Dhar, J

1) Instant petition has been filed by the petitioners seeking quashment of criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.64/2011 for offences under Section 336, 427 and 451 of RPC registered with Police Station, Nowgam, that are stated to be pending before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class (1st Additional Munsiff) Srinagar.

2) As per the contents of the FIR, complainant Bilal Ahmad Tak (petitioner No.3 herein), lodged a written report with Police Station Nowgam, alleging therein that on 25.05.2011, the accused persons (petitioners No.1 and 2 herein), along with some unidentified persons trespassed into his compound, damaged windows and window panes of his house and also threatened his daughter of dire consequences. At the time of the incident, the complainant and his wife were not present in their house. On the basis of this report, the FIR was registered and investigation was set into motion. After investigation of the case, offences under Sections 336, 427 and 451 of RPC were found established against the accused persons and the challan was laid before the Court of competent jurisdiction

3) It seems that during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, the parties i.e., petitioners herein settled the dispute amicably and in this regard, they made an application before the trial court seeking disposal of the criminal case as compromised. The petitioners have produced a copy of the application made before the trial court along with the instant petition. In support of their assertions regarding settlement of dispute/compromise, the statements of the parties have been recorded by the Registrar Judicial wherein they have stated that they have amicably settled their dispute and that they have no grievance against each other.

4) The petitioners have contended that so far as the case arising out of FIR No.64/2011 for offences under Section 336, 427 and 451 of RPC, is concerned, the same could not be compounded because the offences under Section336 of RPC disclosed therein is non-compoundable in nature. It is in these circumstances that the petitioners have approached this Court for seeking quashment of the aforesaid FIR and the proceedings emanating therefrom.

5) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.

6) So far as the facts alleged in the petition, particularly those pertaining to the compromise arrived at between the petitioners, are concerned, the same are not in dispute. In the backdrop of aforesaid facts, the question arises as to whether this Court has power to quash the proceedings, particularly when some of the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused are non-compoundable in nature.

7) It is a settled law that the offences arising out of the disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute, the High Court will be within its jurisdiction to quash the criminal proceedings, particularly when, as a consequence of the compromise arrived at between the parties, there is remote possibility of securing conviction of the accused. In my aforesaid view, I am fortified by the judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of Gian Singh. v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, Narinder Singh & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & anr, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others (Criminal Appeal No.349 of 2019 decided on 5th March, 2019).

8) Adverting to the facts of the instant case, it is clear that the petitioners herein who happen to be the complainant and the accused, have entered into a compromise wherein the complaint (petitioner No.3 herein) has categorically stated that he has no grievance against the accused persons (petitioners No.1 and 2 herein) is not willing to pursue the impugned criminal proceedings. It is also clear that the dispute between the petitioners is essentially of civil nature. In these circumstances, if an end is not put to the criminal proceedings, it would amount to grave injustice to the petitioners and, in fact, it will amount to frittering away of the fruits of compromise that has been arrived at between the parties. The continuance of criminal proceedings against the accused/petitioners, in these circumstances, will be nothing but an abuse of process of law.

9) For the foregoing discussion, the petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings/challan arising out of FIR No.64/2011 for offences under Section 336, 427 and 451 of RPC registered with Police Station, Nowgam, against petitioners No.1 and 2 are quashed.