Amit Saxena vs State Of U.P. And Another
2019 Latest Caselaw 6397 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 83
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28477 of 2019
 

 
Applicant :- Amit Saxena
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Gagan Pratap Singh,Pramod Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ved Prakash Mishra
 

 
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today, which is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1425 of 2015 ( Bhupendra Srivastava Vs. Jai Prakash Sharma and others), under section 420 I.P.C.,Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Agra as well as summoning order dated 14.10.2016 pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Court No. 2, Agra.

It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that both the parties have compromised the matters and thus the impugned complaint and summoning order may be quashed, as offence in question is compoundable with the permission of the Court.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also admitted that both the parties have compromised, as now the respondent no.2 did not oppose the same.

Perusal of the record shows that earlier applicant has filed an application under section 482 Cr. P.C. No. 19440 of 2019 for quashing the proceeding, however that application was rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.05.2019

As the prayer for quashing the impugned complaint and proceeding has already been rejected by this Court vide order dated 17.05.2019 in application under section 482 Cr. P.C. No. 19440 of 2019, thus second application under section 482 Cr. P.C. seeking same relief would not be maintainable. Even otherwise the offence under section 420 I.P.C. is compoundable with the permission of the Court and thus both the parties may compound before the trial court in accordance with law.

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the prayer for quashing as prayed above is here by refused.

Needless to stay that if applicant appears before the trial court and applies for bail, his bail application may be decided expeditiously in accordance with law, keeping in view of the fact that both the parties have settled the dispute.

With the aforesaid observations, present application under section 482 Cr. P.C. is dismissed.

Order Date :- 1.8.2019

T.S.