Rajkumari And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5648 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

?Court No. - 15
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4101 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Rajkumari And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Prakash Singh,Bipul Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.

Vakalatnama filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2 by Sri Javed Khan is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Javed Khan, learned counsel for the complainant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

The instant application has been filed for quashing the proceeding of Criminal Case No. 6228/2014, State vs. Ram Suresh and others, arising out of Case Crime No. 221/2014, u/s 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (X) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Kotwali Akbarpur, District Ambedkarnagar pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Ambedkarnagar.

Learned counsel for the applicants submit that infact the FIR was lodged by the respondent no. 2 under some misconception and at this stage they have entered into a compromise which have been annexed as annexure no. 4 along with this application. Learned counsel for the respondent no. 2 has also supported the version of the applicant and submits that applicant as well as respondent have entered into the compromise and certified copy has been annexed at page 23 onwards.

During the course of argument he has also placed reliance on a judgment passed in Ramawatar vs. State of M.P. in case Appeal No. 1393 of 2011, referring the aforesaid judgment he submits that compromise in such cases has been permitted by the Apex Court also.

The learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2 has also supported the version aforesaid.

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.

In view of the submission aforesaid, the court below is directed that if any such compromise is filed, the court below shall issue notice to all the signatories of the compromise deed requiring their presence before it to verify the compromise and if the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared within one month and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof.

The parties shall be at liberty to assail the criminal proceeding before this Court after verification of compromise deed.

For the period of one month, further proceedings of the Criminal Case No. 6228 of 2014 shall remain stayed.

The petition is disposed of, accordingly.

Order Date :- 30.6.2022

Ujjawal