Allahabad High Court
Manish Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 February, 2021
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18502 of 2020
Applicant :- Manish Kumar And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dhirendra Bahadur Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Kamlesh Kumar Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Dhirendra Bahadur Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet no.29 of 2016 dated 01.10.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 42 of 2018 (Old Criminal Case No.5827/2016) (State vs. Manish Kumar and 3 others), arising out of Case Crime No. 15 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District-Saharanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Saharanpur.
On the matter being taken up, on 04.01.2020 the Court passed following order:-
"Earlier, an application U/s 482 No. 1681 of 2017 was filed with a prayer for quashing of charge sheet dated 01.10.2016 as well as proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5827 of 2016 and a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 18.01.2017 was pleased to direct the applicants to appear and surrender before the court below within 30 days and apply for bail.
In compliance of the order dated 18.01.2017, applicants have already been released on bail as stated in para 7 of the application.
It has further been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that during pendency of the trial, parties have filed mutual divorce petition under Section 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act and counsel for opposite party no. 2 has filed an affidavit along with Vakalatnama stating therein that he has already received a sum of Rs. 9,00,000/- by way of Demand Draft No. 091847 (of Rs.4,00,000/-) and the Demand Draft No. 091848 (of Rs.5,00,000/-) which is one of the conditions mentioned in the mutual divorce petition and now is left with no grudge with the applicants.
In view of the compromise between the parties, let the parties be present before this Court by the next date fixed.
Put up this case on 18th January, 2021, as fresh.
Till then no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants."
Thereafter, several dates have been fixed in the matter but the parties could not appeared before this Court. Today when the matter being taken up, applicant no.1, namely, Manish Kumar is present before this Court, who has been identified by his counsel and his signature has also been attested.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the divorce petition under Section 13(B) of Hindu Marriage Act, an amount of rupees nine lacs has already been handed over to the opposite party no.2, the details of which have been mentioned in para 5 of the counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. It has further been submitted that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 do not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that no grudge and grievance remains as the opposite party no.2 has already received an amount of nine lacs, which was aggrieved upon as per the terms and conditions mentioned in the mutual divorce petition filed by the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before this Court.
Learned A.G.A. has also conceded the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
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. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
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.
Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 42 of 2018 (Old Criminal Case No.5827/2016) (State vs. Manish Kumar and 3 others), arising out of Case Crime No. 15 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District-Saharanpur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Saharanpur, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
In case, the opposite party no. 2 has any grievance subsequent to this order, she is free to move application before this Court in this application.
Order Date :- 19.2.2021
JK Yadav
