Allahabad High Court
Mohd Afsar And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 9 July, 2019
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Raj Beer Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 44
Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 18755 of 2019
Petitioner :- Mohd Afsar And 4 Others
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Tahira Kazmi,Saiful Islam Siddiqui
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.
Sri S.Safdar Ali Kazmi, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no. 4, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Saiful Islam Siddiqui, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Suresh Singh, holding brief of Sri S.Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for respondent no. 4, Sri Abhijeet Mukherjee, learned AGA for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record..
By means of the present petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing the impugned FIR dated 28.08.2018 registered as case crime no. 0318 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 313, 406 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Prayagraj.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that petitioner no. 1 and respondent no. 4 who are husband and wife are living together and they have amicably settled their dispute in the mediation center at district level, a copy of the compromise arrived at between the parties at the district level on 25.02.2019 has been filed as annexure no. 1 to the affidavit dated 09.07.2019 and as the matter has been compromised on 25.02.2019 between the parties, therefore, the present case be finally decided.
Sri Suresh Singh holding brief of Sri S. Safdar Ali Kazmi, learned counsel for respondent no.4 has admitted the fact of the compromise.
Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana & others, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & another, (2012)10 SCC 303 and has submitted that the petitioners and respondent no. 4 have compromised the dispute and as such respondent no. 4 does not want to press the present case against the petitioners. In view of the compromise no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
In this regard the view taken by the Apex court in the case of B.S. Joshi (supra) and Gian Singh versus State Of Punjab (supra) which has been relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner finds force that this court in exercise of its inherent power article 226 of the Constitution of India can quash the F.I.R. as the dispute being matrimonial in nature and have been amicably settled between husband and wife.
Hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence the F.I.R. of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present petition stands allowed.
(Raj Beer Singh, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 9.7.2019
Anand
