Allahabad High Court
Bharat Bhajan vs State Of U.P. And Another on 29 July, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14707 of 2019
Applicant :- Bharat Bhajan
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Saurabh Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Durga Prasad
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri Pawan Shukla, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Durga Prasad, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri Rajnish Pandey, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
On 08.11.2021, the following order was passed:
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the prosecution of the applicants under Section 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act in Criminal Case No. 1339 of 2013 (State of U.P. Vs. Shiv Bhajan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 3 of 2013, pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, IVth, Kanpur Nagar, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the charge sheet had been submitted, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing, copy of compromise deed has been annexed as SA-2 to this application.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions so advanced by learned counsel for the applicant.
Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of one month from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.
List this case on 13.12.2021.
Till then no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.
As per office report dated 17.05.2022, a report of Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.5, Kanpur Nagar dated 10.01.2022 has been placed on record along with compromise deed as well as order dated 23.12.2021 vide which, the compromise entered into the parties has been verified in presence of the parties as well as their respective counsels.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also affirms that the parties have entered into a compromise and copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order dated 21.03.2022, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
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; and
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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) 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 counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1339 of 2013 (State of U.P. Vs. Shiv Bhajan and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 3 of 2013 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate, IVth, Kanpur Nagar, in terms of the compromise dated 08.09.2021, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.7.2022
Madhurima
