Surjeet Kaur And Ors. vs State Of Uttarakhand And Another

Pankaj Purohit, J

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

By means of the present C482 application, applicants have challenged the charge-sheet dated 29.09.2021, the summoning/cognizance order dated 24.02.2022 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar in Criminal Case No.1577 of 2022 State Vs. Surjeet Singh and Others, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120-B IPC arising out of FIR No.59 of 2020 dated 09.02.2020 registered with police station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, as well as the entire proceedings of the above criminal case.

Along with the present C482 application, a joint compounding application (IA/1/2023) is filed duly supported by separate affidavits by applicants and respondent No.2.

In the compounding application, it has been stated by the parties that the applicants and respondent No.2 have amicably settled the dispute, as applicants have resolved all the grievances of the respondent No.2. Therefore, the respondent No.2 doesn’t want to prosecute the applicants any further.

Applicants Surjeet Kaur, Surjeet Singh, Charanpal Singh Sobti are presnt through V.C., while applicant No.3-Manpreet Singh and respondent No.2-Dhan Singh are present before this Court. Both, the applicants and the respondent No.2 are duly identified by their respective counsels. On interaction, they have ratified the averment made in the affidavit filed in support of compounding application. They have admitted that the dispute is settled amicably and they do not want to pursue the matter any further.

Learned counsel for the applicants contends that the offences against Omprakash Saluja, one of the co-accused persons named in the FIR, have already been compounded by a Coordinate Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 20.10.2022 in C482 No.1921 of 2022.

Learned State Counsel, per contra, has raised an objection that the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC, is not compoundable.

In view of the principle of law laid down by Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in 2012 (10) SCC 303 as well as in Transfer petition (Criminal) No.115 of 2012 (Dimpey Gujral Vs. Union Territory of Chandigarh) decided on 06.12.2012, criminal proceedings can be quashed by the Court, if the Court is satisfied that matter has been settled between the parties amicably and parties are interested to restore peace and harmony between them.

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the compounding application as well as the documents available on record, this Court is of the opinion that once the parties have entered into a compromise and they have settled their dispute amicably, there would be no useful purpose for referring the applicants to Court to face the trial. It would be a futile exercise. In view of the compromise arrived at between the parties, nothing remains to be decided in the present matter.

Accordingly, compounding application (IA/1/2023) is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1577 of 2022 State Vs. Surjeet Singh and Others, for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, is hereby quashed qua the applicants. Resultantly, charge-sheet dated 29.09.2021 and FIR No.59 of 2020 dated 09.02.2020 registered with police station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, stand quashed qua the applicants.

Accordingly, the present C482 application is disposed of, in terms of the compromise.