Relief Granted in Criminal Appeal Against Section 406 and 420 IPC Charges

The Supreme Court of India, in the case of Raj Sharma @ Raj Kumar Sharma vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors., has ruled in favor of the appellant by allowing him to move the trial court for compounding the offense after depositing Rs. 1,50,000. The case, which involved charges under Section 406 read with Section 420 IPC, was settled after the complainant agreed to withdraw the prosecution upon receiving the said amount.

The appellant had approached the Supreme Court against the High Court’s rejection of his plea under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The Supreme Court noted that the complainant had received the money and did not wish to continue with the prosecution. The Court directed that the appellant be allowed to move the trial court for compounding the offense, and that all coercive actions, including the freezing of his account, be withdrawn.

Background of the Case

Raj Sharma, the appellant, was accused under Section 406 (Criminal Breach of Trust) and Section 420 (Cheating and Dishonestly Inducing Delivery of Property) of the Indian Penal Code. The High Court had earlier dismissed his plea for quashing the criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C., prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner contended that the dispute was primarily of a financial nature and had been amicably settled. The amount involved in the alleged transaction had been deposited with the Court, and the complainant was willing to withdraw the prosecution.

Respondent’s Arguments

The respondent, represented by the State, pointed out that the offenses under Sections 406 and 420 IPC were compoundable only with the Court’s permission. However, since the complainant was not interested in pursuing the case further, they did not object to compounding the offense.

Key Observations of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, while deciding the matter, stated:

“Taking note of the fact that the parties have purchased peace, we direct the trial court to pass appropriate orders in the interest of justice. All the coercive steps taken against the appellant, including freezing of the account, shall stand withdrawn.”

Judgment and Conclusion

The Supreme Court allowed the appellant to move the trial court for compounding the offense, directing that the deposited amount be released to the complainant. With this ruling, the Court ensured a just resolution while upholding the principle that financial disputes settled amicably should not lead to prolonged criminal prosecution.

This judgment reinforces the Court’s approach in cases where financial disputes can be settled through mutual agreement, thereby reducing unnecessary litigation and allowing parties to resolve matters amicably.

Petitioner Name: Raj Sharma @ Raj Kumar Sharma.
Respondent Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors..
Judgment By: Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.
Place Of Incident: Uttar Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 09-07-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Raj Sharma @ Raj Kum vs The State of Uttar P Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 09-07-2018.pdf