Allahabad High Court
Suneel Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 5 January, 2021
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15420 of 2020
Applicant :- Suneel Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Joint affidavit has been filed on behalf of both the parties in Court today, which is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ansar Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Mohd. Faisal Khan, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the entire proceedings of Case no. 425 of 2018 (State vs. Sunil Kumar and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Banna Devi, District - Aligarh, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.
On 15.10.2020, following order was passed:
"Mohd. Faisal Khan, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2. He states that he shall file joint affidavit of both the parties along with his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in the registry today after serving a copy of the same upon the learned counsel for the applicants.
Heard Mr.Ansar Ahmad, learned counsel for the applicant, Mohd. Faisal Khan, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 425 of 2018 (State Vs. Sunil Kumar & Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 154 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station-Banna Devi pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh in terms of the compromise. Further prayer has been made to stay the proceedings of the aforesaid case.
It is submitted that on account of intervention of well-wishers applicant and opposite party no.2, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties on 28th August, 2018. A copy whereof has been filed as annexure-3 to the affidavit accompanying the present application. It is also stated that both the parties have also filed an application under Section 13-B of Hindu Marriage Act for divorce with mutual consent, which is pending consideration. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also accepts that the parties have arrived at a compromise and copy of the same has also been enclosed along with the joint affidavit of both the parties which shall be filed today in the registry.
Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Put up this case on 17th December, 2020 as fresh before the appropriate Bench.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake to ensure the presence of both the parties before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 23.11.2020 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.
Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order as well as the photocopy of the compromise annexed as Annexure-6 to the affidavit accompanying the present application within a week from today.
Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order before the court concerned on the date fixed before it.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid criminal case.
When the matter is listed next, name of Mohd. Faisal Khan, Advocate shall be shown in the cause list as one of the learned counsel for the opposite party."
In compliance of the order dated 15.10.2020, the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh vide order dated 26.11.2020 has verified the compromise between the parties after ensuring the presence of the parties. The order dated 26.11.2020 has been annexed with the joint affidavit which has been filed today before this Court.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgments of the Apex Court:
a) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003) 4 SCC 675;
b) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677;
c) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1;
d) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303;
e) 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 case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Case no. 425 of 2018 (State vs. Sunil Kumar and others), under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Banna Devi, District - Aligarh, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, is hereby quashed.
This Application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 5.1.2021
Priya
