Allahabad High Court
Dhermendra Singh vs The State on 11 May, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 15
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1412 of 2013
Appellant :- Dhermendra Singh
Respondent :- The State
Counsel for Appellant :- Dhirendra Singh,Onkar Singh
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate,Harendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for appellant, Mr. Harendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for complainant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
This appeal has been preferred on behalf of the appellant Dharmendra Singh assailing the impugned judgment and order dated 09.09.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions judge, Fast Track Court-III, Raebareli in Sessions Trial No. 381 of 2008 arising out of Case Crime No. 24 of 2005 under Sections 147, 323/149, 341, 336/149, 352, 504 & 506 IPC and SEction 3 (1) (x) of the SC/ST Act, Police Station Deeh, District Raebareli. By the impugned judgment the appellant was imposed fine of R. 500/- under Section 147 IPC, fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 323/149 IPC, fine of Rs. 200/- under Section 341 IPC and fine of Rs. 500/- was imposed under Section 504 IPC and fine of Rs. 5,00/- was also imposed under Section 500/-.
At the very outset, learned counsel for appellant 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 dated07.11.2019), which has been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court on 15.03.2022 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 05.03.2022 in the instant appeal.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant 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 appellant Dhermendra Singh. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the appellant Dhermendra Singh 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 criminal appeal stands allowed in terms of the aforesaid compromise.
Order Date :- 11.5.2022
Virendra
