Allahabad High Court
Meraj Khan And 3 Others 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:106997 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11401 of 2023 Applicant :- Meraj Khan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Navneet Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arvind Kumar Rai,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Navneet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Arvind Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Ms. Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the State.
2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the Charge Sheet No.159 of 2022 dated 21.7.2022 and cognizance and summoning order dated 3.9.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.25643 of 2022 (State Vs. Jameela Khatoon and others) in case crime no.176 of 2022, u/s 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gahmer, District Ghazipur, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 04.04.2023, the following order was passed:-
"List revised.
Heard Shri Navneet Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Arvind Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri Raj Kumar Gupta, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed his vakalatnama in Court which is taken on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants-Meraj Khan, Jameela Khatoon, Tamanna Khatoon @ Tabassum and Shahnaj with the prayer to allow this application and quash the Charge Sheet No.159 of 2022 dated 21.7.2022 and cognizance and summoning order dated 3.9.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.25643 of 2022 (State Vs. Jameela Khatoon and others) in case crime no.176 of 2022, u/s 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gahmer, District Ghazipur and further with the prayer to stay the further proceedings of aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the present dispute is an inter-se dispute between the applicants and opposite party no.2. The parties have entered into a compromise dated 21.7.2022, copy of which is annexed as annexure no.3 to the affidavit filed in support of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. It is argued that since the parties have entered into a compromise between themselves, no useful purpose would be served to continue the proceedings and the trial.
Learned counsel for the state has no objection to the said argument.
After having heard learned counsel for both the parties and perusing the records, this Court is of the view that since the parties have entered into a compromise, it is provided that the applicants shall file the compromise deed before the court concerned within a period of two weeks from today, which shall be verified by the court concerned within a further period of two weeks. The court concerned shall send its report to this Court by the next date.
Learned counsel for the applicant is also granted liberty to file the order of verification of compromise before this Court by means of a supplementary affidavit.
Let the matter be listed on 4.5.2023.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 04.04.2023, the concerned Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate has verified the compromise vide order dated 31.05.2023. Certified copy of the aforesaid compromise verification order dated 31.05.2023 has been annexed on page-12 of the short counter affidavit filed on 02.05.2024 by Mr. Arvind Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
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 quash the Charge Sheet No.159 of 2022 dated 21.7.2022 and cognizance and summoning order dated 3.9.2022 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.25643 of 2022 (State Vs. Jameela Khatoon and others) in case crime no.176 of 2022, u/s 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Gahmer, District Ghazipur, pending before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghazipur, 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.