Syed Mohd. Manzar vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5517 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 11
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4021 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Syed Mohd. Manzar
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- D.P. Dutt Tiwari
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

Vakalatnama filed today by Sri Balram Jakhar, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet No.01 of 2019 dated 23.04. 2019 arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No.0065 of 2019, under Sections 504, 506, 352, 323, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Aliganj, District Lucknow and entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No.697 of 2020 (State vs. Syed Manzar) pending in the court of learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, (Custom), Lucknow, along with the further prayer to stay the proceeding of aforesaid criminal case during pendency of the present application.

At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise which has been verified by the court below on 3.6.2022 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 20.4.2022 in Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 929 of 2022.

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for petitioners or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid are quashed.

Learned counsel for petitioners in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble 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 and has submitted that the petitioners and opposite party no. 2 have settled through compromise their private and civil disputes and as such opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the petitioners. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the petitioners and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out.

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. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between the 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.

With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. petition stands allowed.

Order of this Court be communicated to the court below for necessary compliance.

Order Date :- 28.6.2022

Anuj Singh