Allahabad High Court
Amir Patel @ Mohammad Amir And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 July, 2024
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:107047 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13298 of 2023 Applicant :- Amir Patel @ Mohammad Amir And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anwar Hussain Counsel for Opposite Party :- Anees Baig,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Anwar Hussain, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Anees Baig, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the State.
2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicants with the prayer or quashing the charge sheet dated 12.07.2021 and the further proceeding of Criminal Case No. 23207 of 2021 (State Vs. Amir Patel and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 606 of 2019, under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rasoolpur, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 17.04.2023, the following order was passed:-
"Sri Anees Baig, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anees Baig, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 12.07.2021 and the further proceeding of Criminal Case No. 23207 of 2021 (State Vs. Amir Patel and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 606 of 2019, under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rasoolpur, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that both the parties are known to each other very well and the dispute between them is due to land. He further submits that on account of intervention of well-wishers of the applicant and opposite party no.2, they have settled their disputes and arrived at a compromise. On the basis of said compromise, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 before the court below that he does not want to press the criminal proceedings initiated by him against the applicant. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Put up this case on 24.05.2023 before the appropriate Bench.
Learned counsels for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise application before the court below within two weeks from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. They further undertake to ensure their presence before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 27.04.2023 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.
Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours.
Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within a week from today.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
When the matter is listed next, name of Sri Anees Baig shall be shown as the counsel for opposite party no. 2."
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 17.04.2023, report received from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad, has been placed on record as is evident from office report dated 23.05.2023. The letter of CJM, Firozabad dated 27.04.2023 has been placed on record along with compromise deed. Perusal of the aforesaid letter goes to show that the compromise has been verified vide order dated 27.04.2023 between the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
6. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
7. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
(v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
8. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
10. Accordingly, the proceedings of charge sheet dated 12.07.2021 as well as Criminal Case No. 23207 of 2021 (State Vs. Amir Patel and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 606 of 2019, under Sections 420, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Rasoolpur, District Firozabad, pending in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 2.7.2024/Rahul.