The Allahabad High Court has rejected an application seeking quashing an attempt to murder case based on the compromise entered into between the victim and the accused.
The Court observed that the weapon used was a fire-arm and it brooks little doubt that a person who opens FIR at another does so with the intention to kill. He certainly does not do so with the intention to love or play a jest.
A Single Bench of Justice J.J Munir passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 fied by Mujeem.
The application has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings of Session Trial, under Section 307 IPC, P.S Raipura, District Chitrakoot, pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Chitrakoot.
The submission of the counsel for the applicant is that the parties have compromised the matter and moved a compromise application before the Additional Sessions Judge, Chitrakoot in Session Trial, State vs Mujeem on 04.04.2023.
It is argued that there are no chances of conviction since the complainant-opposite party has compromised and would not testify in support of the prosecution, in case trial is held.
The Court noted that,
A perusal of the prosecution case shows that according to the first informant, who is the complainant-opposite party no 2 here, the complainant Sahid Ali son of Raja Husain, a resident of Village Dera, Mauja Bandhi of P.S Raipura, District Chitrakoot along with his uncle Shamshad on 29.12.2010 was riding a motorcycle proceeding home from village Bandhi. When the two reached the Kapoori turning, the applicant, Mujeem was waiting by the side of the canal.
It is said that he bore a grudge against the applicant. Upon seeing the complainant, the applicant chased the complainant at about 7:30 in the evening, and, shortly thereafter, opened fire. The complainant received a gun shot injury to his neck. Despite the injury, the complainant and his uncle gave chase to the applicant, but he made good his escape. The injuries were subjected to a medico-legal examination at the Combined Hospital Chitrakoot.
A reading of the FIR and the medico-legal report does not spare a shadow of doubt that the applicant shot the complainant-opposite party with a country made pistol and the complainant received a gunshot wound to his neck. It is only by sheer luck that he survived the fatal attack.
Counsel for the applicant said that since there are no chances of conviction and given the stance of the complainant-opposite party, who is willing to compromise, proceedings of the case ought to be quashed in view of the holding of the Supreme Court in Narinder Singh and others vs State of Punjab and another (2014) 6 SCC 466.
“In this case, the gunshot injury was sustained on the neck, which is a vital part of the body. The medico legal report clearly shows that there was blackening in the area of 12cm x 12cm at the site of the injury on the neck, where the gun shot injury was received. The supplementary medical report shows evidence of a radio-opaque shadow of metallic density seen in the temporomandibular joint. This shows that the pellets from the fire-arm were lodged in the temporomandibular joint.
This being the nature of an injury and the site, beside the weapon used, to permit the parties to compromise would be an abdication of the State’s function to prosecute offences against the society. This certainly, in the opinion of the Court, cannot be permitted. To the understanding of the Court, the principle laid down in the Narinder Singh case does not approve of such a composition and quashing on its basis. This order will in no manner prejudice in doing an independent of evidence at the trial”, the Court observed while rejecting the application.