KRISHNAPAL Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners, by means of present Criminal Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seek to quash the impugned F.I.R. dated 24.08.2014 registered at P.S. Kankhal, District Haridwar as Case Crime No. 133 of 2014, under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506 & 307 IPC.

(2.) A Compounding Application (CRMA No. 10951 of 2014) is filed before this Court to show that the parties have settled their disputes amicably. The said application is supported by the affidavits of Krishnapal (applicant No. 1 herein) and informant -Subhash Kumar (respondent No. 2 herein). Applicants No. 1, 2 & 3 are present in person, duly identified by their counsel Mr. Gaurav Singh. Respondent No. 4/informant is also present in person before this Court, duly identified by his counsel Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma. The informant -victim submitted that he does not wish to prosecute the petitioners, in as much as, the dispute between the parties was resolved with the intervention of few elderly persons of the village. He prays that he may be permitted to compound the offences against the petitioners, the criminal writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India be allowed and the proceedings of the aforesaid FIR be quashed.

(3.) THE only question which is left for consideration of this Court is -whether the informant should be permitted to compound such offences or not? The permission can be granted to the injured to compound such offences in view of the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Dimpey Gujral vs. Union Territory through Administrator U.T. Chandigarh and others, : 2013 (123) AIC 119 and Narendra Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another, : (2014) 6 SCC 466.