SUBHAN Vs. STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By means of present Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., 1973 the applicant seeks to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 214 of 2016 (Case Crime No. 91 of 2016), State v. Subhan, under Sections 307, 504 and 506 I.P.C., pending before the learned Sessions Judge, District Haridwar.

(2.) An affidavit has been filed by respondent no. 3 Atiqurraheman and the applicant's brother Sahejama @ Sahjama [petitioner/applicant is in jail] to show that the parties have buried their differences and have settled their disputes amicably. Sahejama (brother of the applicant) is present in person duly identified by his counsel Mr. Rajendra Singh Azad, Advocate. Respondents no. 2 to 5 are also present in person, duly identified by their counsel Mr. Sunil Chandra, Advocate. Private respondents including Alishan (respondent no. 5/minor) submitted that parties have settled their disputes amicably and now they have no grievance left against the applicant. Respondents further submitted that they have no objection if the criminal proceedings initiated by them against the applicant are quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

(3.) Whereas the offences under Sections 504 and 506 IPC complained of against the applicant are compoundable offences within the Scheme of Section 320 Cr.P.C., 1973 the offence under Section 307 IPC is not. The question, which arises for consideration of this Court, is whether the private respondents should be permitted to compound the offences alleged against the petitioner or not?