Allahabad High Court
Bhura @ Manish Kumar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 December, 2022
Bench: Vivek Varma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 53
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39967 of 2022
Applicant :- Bhura @ Manish Kumar
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Nipun Singh,Pragyanshu Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Varma,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Roopak Chaubey, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no. 1 and Sri Sumit Suri, learned Advocate, who has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 which is taken on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 40 of 2015, State v. Bhura, arising out of Case Crime No. 26/225/14, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 Prevention of Children from Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Jhijhana, District Muzaffarnagar pending before the Special POCSO Court, District Muzaffarnagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that:-
(i) the dispute between the parties were purely civil and private in nature. The applicant has married the victim and are leading a happy married life having two children;
(ii) the F.I.R. came to be lodged by the father of opposite party no. 2 owing to misunderstandings and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence, as alleged. The informant died during the pendency of the present proceedings;
(iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicant nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred;
(iv) at present, the parties to the dispute who are villagers, have resolved their differences and have made peace;
(v) in view of the settlement reached between the parties, the parties pray another chance be given to them to develop and experience normal relationship;
(vi) the continuance of the criminal trial may in fact hamper the otherwise good chance of the parties enjoying a normal relationship; and,
(vii) in such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the applicant.
It is stated that compromise deed had been filed by the parties before the learned court below. It is further stated that pursuant to the order dated 26.09.2022 passed by this Court in Application No. 31042 of 2022, Bhura @ Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. and another, the parties appeared before the Court below and the learned court below has verified the aforesaid compromise vide order dated 18.10.2022. The copy of the compromise-deed dated 18.10.2022 and the verification order of the Court below dated 18.10.2022 are on the record as Annexures- 9 and 10 to the affidavit.
In support of his contentions, learned counsel for the applicant 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 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that if the criminal prosecution is allowed to proceed, it may create further complication in the otherwise normal relationship that is arising between the hitherto bitterly estranged couple and their families.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that the opposite party no. 2 has no objection if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. He does not dispute the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him.
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 and 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 thus may be allowed.
Order Date :- 20.12.2022
SKT/-
