Veena & Ors. v. State & Anr.

1. This petition is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing of FIR No.8/2008 under Sections 3OBl34It34 IPC registered at P.S. Moti Nagar, Delhi and consequential proceedings arising therefrom.

2. The facts leading to filing the present petition are that on the complaint of respondent No.2 FIR in question was registered against the petitioners at P.S. Moti Nagar, Delhi on 09.01.2008. In the FIR it was alleged by the respondent No.2/complainant that on 09.01.2008 she visited the house of her friend namely Diya, D/o Jagdish Lal, R/o E-232, Karampura, Delhi and when at about.P,?O PM she was returning from 2nd floor then Veena W/o Banwari lal, who is resident of E-233, Karampura, New Delhi camb and asked her as to why she had,F; 2012:DHC:8008 come there because she had given filthy abuses to her earlier also. She started beating the complainant with fist and feet. When the complainant tried to run then son of Veena namely Amit and her daughter Sangeeta obstructed her way and oP caught hold frer. Veena held a danda and gave danda blow on her hand, legs and head. As a result bleeding started and respondent No.2 received multiple injuries on her body. The respondent No.2 cried for help and several persons gathered at the spot rescued her. On the basis of said statement of the complainant/respondent No.2, the FIR in question was registered against the petitioners.

3. That thereafter with the intervention of common friends and respectablesof the locality the petitioners and respondent ? No.2 have amicably settled their dispute and compromised with each other out of their free will and consent and without any pressure, coercion or force from any corner in the month of November,2010.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that since the matter in dispute has been amicably settled between the parties hence no fruitful purpose would be served in prosecuting the petitioners, therefore, the FIR may be quashed.

5. Respondent No.2/complainant is present in Court today. She also affirms that the matter has been amicably compromised with the petitioners and that she is not interested in prosecuting the petitioners and submits that the said FIR and all proceedings emanating therefrom may be quashed.

6. Offences punishable under section 308 lPc is a noncompoundable offence. ln Gian Singh v State of Puniab & Anr' in SLP (Crl.) No.8989/2O7O, the Division Bench of the Supreme ?, Court has referred three earlier decisions viz. B'S,toshi v. State of Haryana (2OO[3]) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (2OO[8]) I SCC 677 and Manoi Sharma v, State & Ors, (2OO[8]) 76 SCC 7 to the larger Bench for re-consideration whether the aforesaid three decisions were decided correctly or not. The matter is yet to be decided by the larger Bench of the Apex Court. Howelqf, a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Nari Motiram Hira v, Avinash Balkrishnan & Anr, has permitted for compounding of the offences of 'non-compoundable' category as per Section 32O Cr.P.C. even after discussing Gian Singh's case.

7. As per the decision of Supreme Court in Shiii @ Pappu & Ors. v. Radhika & anr. in Criminal Appeal No'2O64/2OL[7] decided on 14.11.2011, the cases of non-compoundable nature can be compounded, certainly not after the conviction, observing as under:- '........'....That being so, continuance of the prosecution where the complainant is not ready to support the allegations which are now described by her as arising out of some 'misunderstanding and misconception'; will be a futile exercise that will serve no purpose. lt is noteworthy that the two alleged eye witnesses, who are closely related to the complainant, are also no longer supportive of the prosecution version. The continuance of the; proceedings is thus nothing but an gmPty formality. - Section 482 Cr,P.C. could, in such circumstances, be justifiably invoked by the High Coutt to prevent abuse of the process of law and thereby preventing a wasteful exercise by the Courts below,"

9. Accordingly, the petition is allowed and FIR No.8/2008 under Sections 308134L134 IPC registered at P.S. Moti Nagar, Delhi and consequential proceedings arising therefrom are hereby quashed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. MAY 09, 2OL2-l] 'dc' -.[1] a' vry TIBHA RANI, J