Allahabad High Court
Chandradhar Mishra And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 October, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8632 of 2022
Applicant :- Chandradhar Mishra And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhanshu Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Sudhanshu Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Rakesh Soni, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings, charge-sheet dated 25.03.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 24.08.2019 passed by A.C.J.M.-I, Basti in Criminal Case No.1148 of 2019 (State vs. Chandradhar Mishra & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No.240 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kaptanganj, District-Basti, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-I, Basti, on the basis of compromise.
On 19.04.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 are present.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings, charge-sheet dated 25.03.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 24.08.2019 in Criminal Case No.1148 of 2019 (State vs. Chandradhar Mishra & Ors.), (arising out of Case Crime No.240 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kaptanganj, District-Basti, pending before the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-I, Court No.2, Meerut with an alternative prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that parties have reconciled their differences outside the Court and has filed their compromise application before the learned lower court on 10.02.2022.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions so advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.
Accordingly, the parties are directed to file a compromise application before the learned lower court and appear before it along with a certified copy of this order and file an application for verification of aforesaid compromise which shall be decided by the court concerned within a period of 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order. After due verification, learned counsel for the parties are directed to obtain certified copy of the order of verification of the compromise and place it before this Court on the next date fixed.
List on 11.07.2022.
Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. "
In compliance of the aforesaid order, the compromise between the parties has been verified by the Court below, vide order dated 31.05.2022 in the presence of the parties as well as their respective counsels. The certified copy of the aforesaid verification order dated 31.05.2022 has been annexed as Annexure-SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also affirm that the parties have entered into compromise, they have no objection, if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
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; and
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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) 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 counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, proceedings, charge-sheet dated 25.03.2019 as well as cognizance order dated 24.08.2019 passed by A.C.J.M.-I, Basti in Criminal Case No.1148 of 2019 (State vs. Chandradhar Mishra & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No.240 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Kaptanganj, District-Basti, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M.-I, Basti, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 21.10.2022
Rahul.
