Allahabad High Court
Inderjeet Singh @ Banti 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:107114 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13677 of 2023 Applicant :- Inderjeet Singh @ Banti Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Yashraj Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 22.07.2022 as well as cognizance order dated 02.12.2022 passed by CMM, Kanpur Nagar, and the entire proceeding of Case Crime No.96 of 2022 (State Vs. Inderjeet Singh @ Banti), under Sections 354, 506 I.P.C., P.S.-Nazirabad, District-Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of CMM, Kanpur Nagar, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 26.02.2024, the following order was passed:-
"1. Heard Shri S.K. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri S.D. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 96 of 2022 (State v. Inderjeet Singh @ Banti), under Sections 354, 506 IPC, Police Station- Nazirabad, District- Kanpur Nagar, arising out of Charge-Sheet dated 22.07.2022 as well as cognizance order dated 02.12.2022, pending in the Court of the C.M.M. Kanpur Nagar.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the parties have amicably settled their disputes outside the Court and the opposite party no.2 does not want to prosecute the applicant. The compromise has taken place on 23.09.2023 and the compromise-deed has been annexed as Annexure-S.A.-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the application.
4. Learned AGA for the State does not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. In view of above facts, the parties shall file an application along with the compromise-deed before the concerned Court below and appear before the Court concerned for verification of the compromise third week of March, 2024. On receiving the said application, the Court below shall take steps for verification of the compromise and prepare a verification report. The concerned Court shall send the verification report to this Court, which may be placed on record.
6. List on 10.04.2024, along with the report of the concerned Court regarding the verification of the compromise.
7. No coercive action shall be taken against the applicant till the next date of hearing."
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 26.02.2024, compromise verification report has been placed on record as is evident from office report dated 09.04.2024. The letter of ACMM, Kanpur Nagar dated 20.03.2024 has been placed on record along with the joint affidavit of the parties. Perusal of the aforesaid letter dated 20.03.2024 goes to show that compromise has been verified on 12.03.2024 in presence of the parties.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant 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 also accepts 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 22.07.2022 as well as cognizance order dated 02.12.2022 passed by CMM, Kanpur Nagar, and the entire proceeding of Case Crime No.96 of 2022 (State Vs. Inderjeet Singh @ Banti), under Sections 354, 506 I.P.C., P.S.-Nazirabad, District-Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of CMM, Kanpur Nagar, 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.