PATNA, India, Aug. 7 -- Patna High Court issued the following judgment on July 16:

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

2. The present quashing petition has been preferred to quash the order dated 15.02.2023 passed in Complaint Case No. 386 C of 2022, where learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Danapur took cognizance for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 504 and 379/34 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners.

3. The case of prosecution in brief is that complainant, Rabindra Kumar Sharma resident of Jamalpur, Patna, alleged that on 01.04.2022, five armed individuals including Sunil Kumar, Shubham Kumar, Ribu Devi and two unknown persons forcibly entered his house, assaulted him and his wife Urmila Devi and dragged her by hair and also almost disrobed her with attempt to steal her golden chain worth Rs. 50,000/-. The assailants also scuffled with neighbors, vandalized the complainant's adjacent property, looted belongings including important documents. Sunil Kumar allegedly fired a shot intending to kill the complainant, which missed him.

4. Without exploring the avenue of available merits, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner straightaway submitted that matter appears compromised between the parties and they amicably settled the issue. It is submitted that compromise filed before this Court under joint signature of the parties on affidavit dated 09.07.2025. It is submitted by learned counsel that in view of compromise continuing with the present proceedings before the court below would only amount to abuse of the process of court of law, therefore, same is fit to quashed and set aside. It is submitted by learned counsel that in view of compromise Naubatpur P.S. Case No. 197 of 2022 dated 04.04.2022 filed under Sections 341, 323, 354-B, 379 and 504/34 of the IPC, as lodged by petitioner no. 3 against O.P. No. 2 be also quashed and set aside.

5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that despite compromise as discussed aforesaid, certain offences are of such nature, which is noncompoundable under the law, but by taking note of nature of accusations in the background of the occurrence, in view of legal ratio of Hon'ble Supreme Court as available through Naushey Ali and Ors. Vs. State of U.P. and Anr. (2025 SCC OnLine SC 292), same are also fit to be quashed/set aside.

6. The factum of compromise as submitted above also approved by Mr. Shailesh Kumar learned counsel appearing for O.P. No. 2. It is submitted that he has no objection of compromise if criminal proceedings be quashed in view.

7. It would be apposite to reproduce para no(s). 2, 3 and 4 of the compromise executed between the parties on affidavit dated 09.07.2025, which is as under :-

The rest of the document can be viewed at https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/NiM0MTQxMyMyMDIzIzEjTg==-ksynyU0DUaw=

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.