Allahabad High Court
Satish Nishad And Others vs State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 7 May, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1205 of 2022
Applicant :- Satish Nishad And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Department And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohsin Iqbal
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandan Srivastava
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
By means of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed following reliefs:-
"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 2763 of 2021 (State Vs. Santosh Nishad and others) arising out of charge sheet no. 208 of 2021 dated 5.6.2021 submitted by the police relating to Case Crime No. 107 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Cantt, District Ayodhya/Faizabad pending in the court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faizabad."
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 (by means of compromise deed dated 20.03.2022), which has been verified by the court below on 01.04.2022 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 22.03.2022 in Case:- Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1205 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.
Office is directed to communicate this order to the court concerned for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 7.5.2022
Virendra
