AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
The present Criminal Petition is filed under Section - 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Code’’) to quash the
proceedings in Crime No.32 of 2021 of Dabeerpura Police Station, Hyderabad Commissionerate.
The petitioner herein is sole accused in the said Crime. The offences alleged against him are under Sections - 354, 323 and 506 of IPC.
I.A. Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 are filed by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant seeking to permit her to enter into compromise and to compound the
offences against the accused by recording the compromise and to quash the proceedings in the aforesaid case against the accused.
Heard Mr. Mohd. Muzaferrullah Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner - accused and Mr. Khaled Bin Sayeed, learned counsel for respondent
No.2 - de facto complainant, and also learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of respondent No.1 - State.
The learned counsel for the petitioner - accused would submit that after lodging the complaint with the police by respondent No.2 and after
registration of the above Crime against the accused, the petitioner herein as well as respondent No.2 has come forward to settle the matter amicably
at the instance of well-wishers and elders. In view of the said compromise, the de facto complainant is not interested to continue the criminal
proceedings against the accused. Accordingly, both the parties filed a joint memo before this Court to that effect. Further, the de facto complainant
has filed petitions along with affidavit, vide I.A. Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 to permit her to enter into compromise and to compound the offences by
quashing the proceedings against the accused. In view of the same, the learned counsel sought to quash the proceedings against the petitioner -
accused.
The learned counsel for respondent No.2 - de facto complainant has given consent for compromise and to quash the proceedings against the
petitioner - accused.
The contents of the complaint lodged by respondent No.2 - de facto complainant against the accused would reveal that the acused had already
indulged in several criminal cases and that he has intentionally harassing to each and every person in her locality. It would further reveal that on
16/17.02.2021 at about 1.00 a.m., the accused came to her house in a drunken condition and knocked the door of her house. When he woke up and
opened the door, the accused attacked on her with fist blow on her chest and abdomen and also tried to outrage her modesty. However, she could
escape from his clutches and made hue and cry. In the said process, she fell on the ground, due to which she had suffered scratch marks on her
hands, legs and shoulder. On account of hue and cry, neighbours woke up, seeing the same, the accused left the place stating that he would come and
kidnap her and kill her and her husband.
With the above said allegations, respondent No.2 lodged a complaint to the police with a request to take necessary action against the accused
herein. On receipt of the said complaint, the police registered the aforesaid crime against the accused for the aforesaid offences and took up for
investigation.
In view of the above, prima facie, there are specific allegations made against the accused which are serious in nature and against a woman.
Moreover, in the present case, it is neither a matrimonial dispute between the spouses, nor a commercial / civil dispute. On the other hand, the
offences involved in the present case are the offences which will have impact on the society. In this regard, it is relevant to mention the parameters
laid down by the Apex Court in the State of Madhya Pradesh v. Laxmi Narayan 2019 (5) SCC 403 which are as under:
“i) that the power conferred under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings for the non-compoundable offences under Section
320 of the Code can be exercised having overwhelmingly and predominantly the civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial
transactions or arising out of matrimonial relationship or family disputes and when the parties have resolved the entire dispute amongst themselves;
ii) such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involved heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder,
rape, dacoity, etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society;
iii) x x x x;
iv) x x x x;
v) while exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code to quash the criminal proceedings in respect of non-compoundable offences, which are
private in nature and do not have a serious impart on society, on the ground that there is a settlement/compromise between the victim and the
offender, the High Court is required to consider the antecedents of the accused; the conduct of the accused, namely, whether the accused was
absconding and why he was absconding, how he had managed with the complainant to enter into a compromise etc.â€
In view of the above discussion and considering the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in Laxmi Narayan1 and also considering the fact that
the offences alleged against the accused are the offences which will have impact on the society, this Court is not inclined to quash the proceedings in
the aforesaid crime merely on the ground that the parties have entered into compromise.
Accordingly, I.A. Nos.2 and 3 of 2021 are dismissed and consequently, the Criminal Petition is also dismissed.
As a sequel, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the Criminal Petition shall stand closed.