LAWS(ALL)-2022-5-262

GOLU Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Decided On May 11, 2022
Golu Appellant
V/S
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Dr. S.B.Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajeshwar Singh and Rakesh Chand Srivastava learned A.G.A. assisted by Madnesh Prasad Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State and perused the material on record. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of proceeding (including cognizance and summoning order) of S.T. No. 164 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime no. 30 of 2019, under Ss. 323, 504 IPC and Sec. 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of Schedule Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Aurai, District Bhadohi pending in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Bhadohi Gyanpur pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties.

(2.) Learned counsel for the applicant submit that an FIR had come to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties. With passage of time, they have been able to resolve their differences and have settled their dispute amicably in writing. It is further submitted that vide order dtd. 8/2/2022, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court had referred the matter for verification of the compromise, which has been verified but the learned Court below has further observed that since the matter pertains to offence under SC/ ST Act, the same is refused to be accepted. Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the matter under SC/ ST Act can be compromised and in support of his contention, he has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court dtd. 25/10/2021 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1393 of 2021 Ramawatar Vs. State of Madya Pradesh.

(3.) In the instant case, proceedings under Ss. 323, 504 I.P.C. and Sec. 3 (1) (r) and 3 (1) (s) have been sought to be quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties. Although Sec. 323, 504 I.P.C. are compoundable, but the sole question before this Court is as to whether proceedings under SC/ST Act can be quashed on the basis of compromise?