Rohit And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another
2022 Latest Caselaw 4980 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 52
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4362 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Rohit And 2 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Yadav,Mahendra Pratap
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Singh
 

 
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

Heard Mr. Anurag Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and Mr. Abhishek Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.

By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing the entire proceedings and summoning order dated 6.8.2018 passed by learned Civil Judge (S.D.)/F.T.C./Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Baghpat in Complaint Case No.2076 of 2017 (Rahul vs. Rohit and others) under Sections 498-A, 323, 307, 504, 506 IPC at Police Station Chandi Nagar, District Baghpat on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the parties have entered into compromise and the same has been filed before the court below on 04.01.2022 which has been verified. According to compromise, on mutual consent, the parties have obtained divorce decree, copy of compromise has been annexed as Annexure No.6 to the application. As per compromise, the victim Anuradha got return her entire Stridhan and also got Rs.2,25,000/- through demand draft out of Rs.4,50,000/-. After getting divorce and withdrawal of maintenance case, she will get rest amount of Rs.2,25,000/-. It has further been contended that the now the parties do not want to proceed further, hence, the proceeding against the applicants be liable to be quashed on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicants and opp. party No.2 have compromised the dispute and as such opp. party No.2 does not want to press the present case against the applicants.

On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 have stated that they have no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the applicants.

From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.

In this regard, the view taken by the Apex court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State (supra), Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra) & Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra), which have been relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants finds force that this court in exercise of its inherent power under section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceeding as the dispute being matrimonial in nature and have been amicably settled between the parties.

Hence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case and nature of offence the proceeding of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed.

Order Date :- 6.6.2022

Ajeet