Allahabad High Court
Satyaveer And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 8 July, 2019
Bench: Om Prakash-Vii
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24432 of 2016
Applicant :- Satyaveer And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shrawan Kumar Dubey,Shrawan Kumar Dubey,Yogendra Misra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar,Satya Narayan Yadav
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
Vakalatnama annexing affidavit filed today by Shri Rajesh Singh, Advocate on behalf of applicants and short counter affidavit alongwith certified copy of joint affidavit of parties filed before the court below today by Shri S.N. Yadav, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no. 2 are taken on record.
Heard Shri Rajesh Singh, Advocate on behalf of the applicants and Shri S.N. Yadav, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the state.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 02.06.2014 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 2 / Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad in criminal Case No. 591 of 2014 (Smt. Vineeta Vs. Satyaveer and others) in case crime No. 52 of 2013, under Sections 498-A, 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Firozabad.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that although matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, which was failed yet parties have settled the disputes out of court. Husband and wife both are living together, as is clear from the short counter affidavit filed today in the matter. It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that it is a matrimonial dispute and all disputes and differences have been settled between the parties. At this stage, learned counsel further submitted that continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid case will be an abuse of process of law. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582.
On the other hand, learned AGA opposed the prayer on the ground that offence under Section 307 IPC is also involved in this matter, which is not compoundable and cannot be quashed taking recourse to the provisions of Section 482 Cr.P.C.
I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.
In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in non-compoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in case the justice so demands. According to Hon'ble Supreme Court, if the offence involve, private dispute between the parties of commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.
Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.
In view of the above, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.
The entire proceedings of criminal Case No. 591 of 2014 (Smt. Vineeta Vs. Satyaveer and others) in case crime No. 52 of 2013, under Sections 498-A, 307, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Firozabad and summoning order dated 02.06.2014 passed by Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Court No. 2 / Judicial Magistrate, Firozabad against the applicants are quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties.
Order Date :- 8.7.2019
Sanjeet
