Allahabad High Court
Shyambabu And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 August, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11880 of 2021
Applicant :- Shyambabu And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ayub
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhilesh Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicants, is taken on record.
Office is directed to register the same.
Heard Mr. Mohd. Ayub, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. C.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 2.10.2016, cognizance order dated 7.10.2016 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.929 of 2016 (State Vs. Shyam Babu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.856 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Sadabad, District Hathras pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Sadabad, Hathras.
On 24.09.2021, the following order was passed:-
"Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicants, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 2.10.2016, cognizance order dated 7.10.2016 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.929 of 2016 (State Vs. Shyam Babu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.856 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Sadabad, District Hathras pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Sadabad, Hathras.
It is submitted by learned counsel for applicants that with intervention of common friends and relatives both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered between the parties on 20.3.2021, copy of which has been filed as Annexure S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit.
The applicants shall file an application along with the compromise deed before the concerned Court below within 15 days for verification of the compromise. On receiving the said application the Court below shall take steps for verification of the compromise, within 15 days from date of receiving application and compromise, and shall prepare a report. The parties on filing a suitable application shall also be given a certified copy of the report.
List in the week commencing 1.11.2021 before appropriate Bench, on which date, the applicants shall file the report of the concerned Court regarding the verification of the compromise.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against applicants in aforementioned case.
This case shall not be treated as tied up/part heard to this Bench."
In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 24.09.2021, certified copy of order dated 08.10.2021 has been filed alongwith supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants. As per the said order dated 08.10.2021, the parties have entered into compromise and the compromise, so filed, has been verified in the presence of parties alongwith their counsel.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits 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. does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he 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 2.10.2016, cognizance order dated 7.10.2016 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.929 of 2016 (State Vs. Shyam Babu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.856 of 2015, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Sadabad, District Hathras pending in the court of A.C.J.M., Sadabad, Hathras 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 :- 1.8.2022
Jitendra/-
