Allahabad High Court
Sunny Sahu And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 January, 2021
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16719 of 2020
Applicant :- Sunny Sahu And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Lal Chandra Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Harish Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Lal Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Harish Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. Perused the record.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 03.07.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 30.09.2020 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7726 of 2020 (State Vs. Sunny Sahu and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 193 of 2020, under Sections- 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Sipari Bazar, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi on the basis of compromise between the parties.
On the matter being taken up, on 18.11.2020 the Court passed following order:-
"Sri Harish Pratap Singh, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama along with a short counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no. 2 in the Registry today.
Heard Sri Lal Chandra Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 03.07.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 30.09.2020 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7726 of 2020 (State Vs. Sunny Sahu and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 193 of 2020, under Sections- 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Sipari Bazar, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the charge sheet had been submitted, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing, copy of compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure - 3 to this application.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions so advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.
Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of one month from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.
Put up this case on 20th January, 2021 as fresh.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
When the case is next listed, the name of Sri Harish Pratap Singh, Advocate be shown as learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 in the cause list. "
Pursuant to aforesaid order dated 18.11.2020, the compromise deed was filed by the parties before the concerned court below and the said compromise deed has been verified by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi vide order 04.01.2021 after ensuing presence of the parties and the statements of parties have also been recorded. Certified copy of the order dated 04.01.2021 has been passed on to the Court today, is kept on record.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants 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 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 since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, 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 charge sheet dated 03.07.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 30.09.2020 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7726 of 2020 (State Vs. Sunny Sahu and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 193 of 2020, under Sections- 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Sipari Bazar, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi, 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.
Order Date :- 20.1.2021
JK Yadav
