Allahabad High Court
Afasar vs State Of U.P.And Another on 17 May, 2022
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28624 of 2021
Applicant :- Afasar
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dhiraj Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
By means of this applicant under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has prayed following reliefs:-
"to pass an order or direction for quashing of charge sheet dated 11.12.2015 as well as cognizance order dated 27.2.2016 along with entire proceedings initiated against the applicant in Criminal Case No. 580 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 177 of 2015 (State of U.P. Vs. Manauvar and Others), under Sections 392 and 411 IPC, Police Station Behat, District Saharanpur in respect of applicant in terms of compromise dated 15.11.2021, pending in the court of Ld. Juvenile Justice Board/ACJM-I, Saharanpur, District-Saharanpur.
At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that in pursuance of the order dated 6.4.2022, both the parties have appeared before the J.J.B. alongwith their counsels. The applicant as well as opposite party no. 2 duly identified by their respective counsels and the verification report was prepared by J.J.B., which was annexed with this file. The dispute have amicably been settled vide a compromise deed dated 15.11.02021, which has been verified by the court below.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant 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 applicant. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant 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. application stands allowed.
Order of this Court be communicated to the court below for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 17.5.2022
Vibha Singh
