Allahabad High Court
Umar Mohammad vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 October, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14062 of 2022
Applicant :- Umar Mohammad
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Zakir
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.
Heard Mr. Mohammad Zakir, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. C.P. Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge sheet dated 23.10.2019 as well as summoning order dated 24.10.2019 and the entire proceeding of S.T. No.602 of 2019, Case No.8016 of 2019 (State Vs. Umar Mohammad), arising out of Case Crime No.0592 of 2019, under Section 366, 120B I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahar, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar.
On 15.07.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.
Heard Mr. Mohammad Zakir, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Amit Singh Chandan, learned learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant to quash the charge sheet dated 23.10.2019 as well as summoning order dated 24.10.2019 and the entire proceeding of S.T. No.602 of 2019, Case No.8016 of 2019 (State Vs. Umar Mohammad), arising out of Case Crime No.0592 of 2019, under Section 366, 120B I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahar, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the F.I.R. was lodged against the Amir, Sattar, Parveen @ Pappan, Umar Mohammad and Aas Mohammad, under Sections 366 and 120B I.P.C. After investigation, charge sheet has been submitted against the applicant, under Sections 366 and 120B I.P.C. whereas against the other accused, investigation is pending. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that victim is the deponent in the present case. He further submits that in compliance of the order of the writ Court, statement of the victim under Section 164 Cr.P.C. was recorded, in which she has made allegations against Imamuddin, Wasim, Zulfikar, Mosin and not against the applicant. He further submits that victim has married with the Amir and is living happy married life as has been deposed by her in paragraph 14 of this application. Due to wedlock she has blessed with one child. The applicant is brother-in-law of the Amir and has no concern with the allegations as levelled in the F.I.R., therefore, no offence under the relevant section is made out against the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that applicant and victim have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them out of Court and victim does not have any grudge against the applicant as is clear from the averments made in the present application so filed. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court below and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of the process of law.
Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant. Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date.
Put up this case on 29.08.2022 as fresh.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise deed along with an application as well as certified copy of this order before the court below within two weeks from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. They further undertake to ensure their presence before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant."
In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 15.07.2022, the court concerned has verified the compromise vide order dated 11.08.2022 in the presence of parties alongwith their respective counsels. Certified copy of order dated 111.08.2022 has been annexed as Annexure No.S.A.2 to the supplementary affidavit filed today.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 23.10.2019 as well as summoning order dated 24.10.2019 and the entire proceeding of S.T. No.602 of 2019, Case No.8016 of 2019 (State Vs. Umar Mohammad), arising out of Case Crime No.0592 of 2019, under Section 366, 120B I.P.C., Police Station-Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahar, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 20.10.2022
Jitendra/-
