Allahabad High Court
Kamla Singh @ Kamla Kumari vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 27 July, 2021
Bench: Ramesh Sinha, Saroj Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 9
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 13043 of 2021
Petitioner :- Kamla Singh @ Kamla Kumari
Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home,Lko.& Ors.
Counsel for Petitioner :- Avinash Pandey
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Ravindra Nath Mishra
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.
Hon'ble Mrs. Saroj Yadav,J.
Heard Shri Avinash Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Ravindra Nath Mishra, learned counsel for the respondent No.4, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the impugned F.I.R. as well as material brought on record.
The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, to quash the First Information Report dated 12.06.2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Ghazipur, District Lucknow, with a further prayer of no coercive action against the petitioner during the pendency of the instant writ petition.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the dispute between the parties is purely of a civil nature. The parties have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and entered into a compromise. Now, the respondent No.4 has no grievance with the petitioner, but the compromise which has been arrived between the parties is not being entertained by the Investigating Officer, hence the impugned F.I.R. be quashed by this Court on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
Learned counsel for the petitioners in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1 and Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another reported in 2008 (9) SCC 677 and has submitted that the petitioner and respondent No.4 have entered into a compromise and settled the dispute, and as such respondent No.4 does not want to press the aforesaid case against the petitioner. The respondent No.4 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the petitioner and in view of the compromise no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
Learned counsel for the respondent No.4 has admitted the fact of the compromise entered between the parties and has no objection, if the impugned F.I.R. is quashed on the basis of aforesaid compromise.
From the 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, there is minimal chance of witnesses coming forward in support of prosecution case and it may become difficult to prove the prosecution case, hence, chances of conviction appear to be remote. 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 Manoj Sharma (supra) and Nikhil Merchant (supra) that this court in exercise of its inherent power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India can quash the F.I.R.
In view of the same, the writ petition in relation to the impugned First Information Report dated 12.06.2021 lodged as FIR No. 0324 of 2021, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station Ghazipur, District Lucknow, is hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed.
(Saroj Yadav, J.) (Ramesh Sinha, J.)
Order Date :- 27.7.2021
Arun
