Case Title:
Israr @ Israr Ahmad And Others Vs. State Of UP Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Date Of Order:
3rd August 2022
Judge:
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.
Parties:
Petitioner: Israr @ Israr Ahmad And Others
Counsel for Applicant:- Chandra Bhanu Singh
Respondent: - State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another
Counsel for Opposite Party:- G.A., Seema Upadhyay
Subject
According to the Allahabad High Court, payment of compensation to victims under the SC/ST Act shall only occur after the accused has been found guilty, not before the FIR and charge sheet have been filed.
Important Provisions
1. Section 482 Cr. P.C
This section states that while saving the High Court's inherent powers, nothing in this Code shall be construed as limiting or affecting the inherent authority of the High Court to issue any orders that may be required to carry out any orders made hereunder, to prevent abuse of any Court's process, or to further the interests of justice.
2. IPC
-
Section 147
This section talks about the punishment for rioting
Anyone found guilty of rioting will be punished with either type of jail for a time that may go as long as two years, a fine, or both.
-
Section 323
The topic of punishment for willful harm-causing is covered in this section.
-
Section 504
This section discusses intentional insult with the purpose to cause a disturbance.
Intentionally insulting someone and provoking them in this way with the aim or knowledge that doing so will likely lead to them breaking the peace or committing another crime is punishable by imprisonment of either kind for a term up to two years, a fine, or a combination of the two.
-
Section 506
The topic of criminal intimidation punishment is covered in this section.
Criminal intimidation is a crime that carries a penalty of up to two years in jail, a fine, or both. If a person is threatened with death or serious injury, for example, they will also receive a fine.
3. S.C./S.T. Act
Section 3 of this act talks about the penalties for atrocity offences
- Section 3(1)(da)
- Section 3(1)(DHA)
Brief Facts
- As a member of the S.C. community, the complainant filed an FIR against the petitioners, who were the accused, and after a police investigation, a charge sheet was issued.
- Following the filing of the charge sheet, the parties reached a deal to end the case.
- The State Government has since given the complaint Rs. 75,000 as compensation.
- This petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code was submitted on behalf of the petitioners who are accused to have the proceedings quashed.
- Compromise reached between the parties is the basis for quashing the proceedings.
- The complainant, who is said to be the victim of the offence, claims that he has reached a solution with the opposing parties and that he does not want the legal action against the petitioners, who are the accused, to continue.
Questions Raised
- Whether it is possible to quash the proceedings under Sections 147, 323, 504, and 506 IPC, as well as Sections 3(1)(da) and 3(1)(DHA) of the S.C./S.T. Act, because the alleged victim and the accused had compromised the case.
Cases Referred to By the Court
I. Ramawater Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2021 SCC OnLine SC 966)
In this judgement, the Supreme Court ruled that it cannot be overstated that because members of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe belong to the lower socioeconomic groups in our nation, they are more vulnerable to coercion and should therefore be given a higher level of protection. The accused party is not eligible for a remedy if the courts find even the slightest indication of coercion or force. The facts and circumstances of each case would determine which criteria the courts should take into account.
Analysis by the Court
- The Court observed that the complainant enters into a compromise with the accused for the quashing of the proceedings in a significant number of cases every day after receiving compensation from the State Government, and a petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings based on the compromise reached between the parties.
- According to this Court, taxpayer money is being wasted during this procedure.
- The court further stated that it would be acceptable to only pay out the compensation once the offender has been found guilty, rather than after an FIR and charge sheet have been filed.
- The State is now free to recover the compensation back to the alleged victim in situations where the complainant and the accused have reached a compromise for the quashing of the proceedings, and the proceedings are quashed by this Court against the accused by its authority under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
- The court further observed that except for the offence under Section 3(1)(da) and (DHA) of the SC/ST Act, the offence against the petitioners was of a minor kind.
Conclusion
The court determined that this case was directly covered by the ruling made by the Supreme Court in Ramawater v. State of Madhya Pradesh since the parties had resolved to put their conflict behind them and live in peace by reaching a compromise (supra).
Hence, the court allowed the petition.
The court also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the chief secretaries of the A.C.S. and the home departments of the governments of Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand, as well as the principal secretaries and additional chief secretaries of the social welfare departments, to ensure any necessary compliance.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
