Allahabad High Court
Vikas Chawla And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 February, 2021
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2105 of 2021
Applicant :- Vikas Chawla And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Prakash
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijendra Kumar Srivastava
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Counter affidavit has been filed by learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 today in the Court, is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Mahendra Prakash, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Brijendra Kumar Srivastava, 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. 93/2016, dated 30.11.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 3341 of 2017 (State vs. Vikas Chawla and another), arising out of Case Crime No.596 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Tronica City, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Ghaziabad.
It is also submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that there is a matrimonial dispute between the parties. It is also submitted that the parties have amicably settled their dispute in furtherance of which, they have filed a divorce suit before the concerned court below. The aforesaid divorce suit has been decreed vide order dated 05.03.2020. In the order dated 05.03.2020, the terms and conditions of settlement have been mentioned, which are as follows:-
"(i) Out of the aforesaid settled amount, a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- has already been paid to the Petitioner no.2 on 13.12.2019 at the time of Settlement before Mediation Centre, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi by way demand draft.
(ii) Rs. 2,50,000/- has been paid to the Petitioner no.2 vide Manager's cheque bearing no. 002549 dated 04.01.2020 issued by HDFC Bank, Tronica City, Ghaziabad at the time of recording of the statement in first motion petition.
(iii) Rs. 1,00,000/- has already been paid to the Petitioner no.2 at the time of withdrawal of the complaint case under Section 12 of D.V. Act.
(iv) Rs. 1,00,000/- is already paid to the Petitioner no.2 in complaint under section 406 IPC at Ghaziabad Court.
(v) Rs. 2,50,000/- has been paid to the Petitioner no.2 vide Manager's Cheque bearing no. 002669 dated 26.02.2020 issued by HDFC Bank, Tronica City Loni, Ghaziabad-201102 (copy placed on record) at the time of recording of the statement in Second Motion.
(vi) Remaining amount of Rs. 2,00,000/- shall be paid to the Petitioner no.2 at the time of quashing of F.I.R. No. 596/16, PS:Tonica City, Ghaziabad U/s 498A/323/504/506 IPC r/w Section 3/4 D.P. Act before the Hon'ble High Court at Allahabad."
On account of aforesaid settlement and compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 do not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that the terms and conditions as mentioned in the mutual divorce petition have been complied with in totality and no grudge and grievance have been left against the applicant, therefore, the opposite party no.2 has no grievance and has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
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 further proceedings of Case No. 3341 of 2017 (State vs. Vikas Chawla and another), arising out of Case Crime No.596 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Tronica City, District-Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Ghaziabad, 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 :- 23.2.2021
JK Yadav
