Allahabad High Court Refused To Quash Attempt To Murder Case Based On Comprise: Vital Parts Not Receiving Injuries Does Not Mean Offence Isn’t Heinous

The Allahabad High Court in the case Narendra Pratap Singh vs. State of U.P. and another observed and has refused to quash an attempt to murder case under section 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 which is being based on compromise entered into between the victim and the accused.

The bench of Justice JJ Munir in the case observed that all the gunshot injuries being sustained on the limbs and not on the torso or to any vital part of the body of complainant, but the same did not show that the offence was not heinous or there was no such intention to kill. Adding to it, the court stated that if a man shoots another, while inflicting as many as four gunshot wounds and that the injuries were sustained on the limbs. The court also observed the fact that the victim did not receive injuries to one or the other vital parts of the body can only be credited to the victim’s good luck or for providence smiling on him.
It has also been opined by the court that there being no offence which is in the domain of a kind of private dispute between parties, thus, about which the society may have no substantial concern.

Further, the court refused to quash the matter in exercise of its powers stated under Section 482.

Facts of the Case:
The Accused Narendra Pratap Singh moved the Court wherein seeking to quash 307 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 wherein the offence is registered against him on the ground that he and the complainant or victim, being related to each other and has entered into a compromise. Earlier, the compromise application is rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, the court stated that the charge against the accused is heinous in nature and is not compoundable.

Observations Made by Court:
It has also been noted by the court that the ASJ could not have allowed herself the compromise application and because the said offence is not being compoundable and all she could do was to verify the compromise, the High Court could have acted upon the same. The court while observing the facts quashed the prosecutions by the Trial Court, wherein the parties made compromise in the exercise of powers stated under Section 482 of the Code, the court also referred to the ruling of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh and others v. State of Punjab and another
Accordingly, the court refused to quash the prosecution in the instant case while noting that the offence involved in question the conscience of the society.

Latest news

Related news