Allahabad High Court
Mohd. Manj And 5 Others vs State Of U.P.And Another on 25 July, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13402 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohd. Manj And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Murat
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinod Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Ram Murat, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Vinod Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 25.12.2018 and cognizance order dated 22.02.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Saharanpur in Criminal Case No.132 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.356 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307, 336, 452 IPC, at present registered as Session Trial No.363 of 2019 (State vs. Mohd. Manj), pending before the court of Additional District Judge, Court No.8, Saharanpur.
On 01.06.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Power of Sri Vinod Singh on behalf of O.P. No.2 is taken on record.
Heard Sri Ram Murat, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Vinod Singh, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and the learned A.G.A.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of S.T. No.363/2019 (State vs. Mohd. Manj), arising out of Case Crime No.356/2018, under Sections 147/148/149/323/324/325/326/307/336/452 IPC, pending in the court of Addl. District Judge, Court No.8, Saharanpur.
It is jointly submitted by learned counsel for the respective parties that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties on 6.4.2022, copy of which is Annexure - 7 to this application. It is further contended proceedings of 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.
Whether a compromise has taken place or not, can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Learned A.G.A. has accepted notice on behalf of O.P. No.1
List on 25.7.2022.
Learned counsel for parties undertake to ensure the presence of the parties concerned before the court below and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, same shall be made part of the record and the court concerned shall send a report to that effect, to this Court in a sealed cover, positively by the next date.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicants. "
In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 01.06.2022, a letter dated 20.07.2022 from Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.8, Saharanpur has been received in a sealed cover, which has been opened before the Court today. As per the report 18.07.2022, the parties have entered into compromise and the compromise, so filed, has been verified in the presence of parties.
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 25.12.2018 and cognizance order dated 22.02.2019 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Saharanpur in Criminal Case No.132 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No.356 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 307, 336, 452 IPC, at present registered as Session Trial No.363 of 2019 (State vs. Mohd. Manj), pending before the court of Additional District Judge, Court No.8, Saharanpur 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 :- 25.7.2022
Jitendra/-
