Sahil Gumber vs State Of Uttarakhand & Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned Counsel for the parties.

Present C528 application has been filed by the applicant along with the compounding application (IA/1/2025) for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7865 of 2022 (FIR No.224 of 2021), State vs. Sahil Gumber, u/s 354 & 506 IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

The ground for seeking compounding of offences is that parties have reached to the terms of compromise wherefor a settlement has also reached between them. It is thus, prayed that the present proceedings between the parties may be quashed in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Learned State Counsel raised a preliminary objection to the effect that the offence under Section 354 IPC sought to be compounded is non-compoundable.

Applicant (Sahil Gumber) appeared physically and respondent no.2 (Srishti Arora) appeared through V.C. are present in the Court being duly identified by their respective counsel.

In the compounding application, it has been stated that applicant and respondent no.2 were known to each other since long but due to some differences between the parties the present FIR has been lodged by respondent no.2 and as of now, respondent no.2 does not want to prosecute the present applicant. It is further stated that during the pendency of trial, parties have reached into the amicable settlement and now the parties have no grievance against each other and withdraw the same. Respondent no.2 is now a happily married lady.

Since the parties have settled the dispute amicably and do not want to pursue the aforesaid criminal case, therefore, there is no useful purpose for keeping this criminal case pending and it will be a futile exercise to ask the applicant to appear before the trial court as accused to face the trial.

So far as compounding of non-compoundable offence is concerned, the Apex Court has dealt with the consequence of a compromise in this regard in the case of B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, reported in (2003)4 SCC 675 and has held as below: -

“If for the purpose of securing the ends of justice, quashing of FIR becomes necessary, Section 320 Cr.P.C. would not be a bar to the exercise of power of quashing. It is, however, a different matter depending upon the facts and circumstances of each case whether to exercise or not such a power.”

Thus, the High Court, in exercise of its inherent power can quash criminal proceedings or FIR or complaint, and Section 320 of Cr.P.C. does not limit or affect the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Since the parties have reached to the terms of the compromise, this Court is of the firm opinion that there would be a remote or bleak possibility of conviction in this case. It can also safely be inferred that it would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to permit continuation of the criminal proceedings after settlement. Since the answer to the aforesaid points is in affirmative, this Court finds it a fit case to permit the parties to compound the matter.

Accordingly, compounding application (IA/1/2025) is hereby allowed. The compromise arrived at between the parties is accepted. With the result, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.7865 of 2022 (FIR No.224 of 2021), State vs. Sahil Gumber, u/s 354 & 506 IPC, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate-1st, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar are hereby quashed. FIR No.224 of 2021 and the charge-sheet filed pursuant thereto also stand quashed.

Present criminal misc. application thus stands allowed. Other pending applications, stand disposed of accordingly.