Allahabad High Court
Mahroof Alias Sartaj Alam And 4 ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 13 January, 2021
Bench: Ajit Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16322 of 2020
Applicant :- Mahroof Alias Sartaj Alam And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Md. Nuruddin Khan
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mohd. Nuruddin Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 21.08.2019 as well as charge sheet dated 27.09.2017 and entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.9443 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 504, 506, 427, 323 I.P.C., Police Station Noorpur, district Bijnor arising out of Crime No.376 of 2017, pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Court No.1, Bijnor.
Learned counsel for the applicants submit that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise have entered between them which has been reduced in writing, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.44 of the application. He further submitted that the compromise was submitted by the parties before the lower court and the lower court has verified the said compromise, copy whereof has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. In fact, short counter affidavit filed today discloses that the compromise has been entered into between the parties. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicantd and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicantd. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From perusal of the record, it is apparent that parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed and the proceedings of the aforesaid said case is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 13.1.2021
R./
