Allahabad High Court
Jay Prakash And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 September, 2022
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 85
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16928 of 2022
Applicant :- Jay Prakash And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sati Shanker Tripathi
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Sri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashish Kumar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri S.S. Tripahti, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Sri Pawan Srivastavva, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
On 29.06.2022, the following order was passed:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants; Sri Sati Shanker Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
Learned counsels for the parties have agreed that parties have entered into compromise, which has been filed before the court below, but no order has been passed on the same.
The court below is directed to verify and decide the compromise within a period of one month and send its report before this Court within a period of two weeks thereafter.
Put up this case on 8.9.2022 as a fresh case.
Further proceeding in SST No. 1078 of 2018 (Devi Singh Vs. Jay Prakash and others), arising Case Crime No.14 of 2004, under Sections- 147, 227, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)10 SC/ST Act, Police Station- Barsana, District- Mathura, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Court (SC/ST Act), District Mathura, shall remain stayed against the applicants, till the next date of listing."
As per office report dated 07.09.2022, the report regarding verification of compromise has been placed on record as per report dated 16.08.2022 which has been placed along with the affidavits and order dated 14.07.2022 vide which the compromise has been verified in presence of the parties and their respective counsels.
In view of the above, learned counsel for the applicants submits that continuation of proceedings in respect of the parties will be a futile exercise and sheer wastage of time of the Court and would also amount to abuse of process of law as the opposite party has entered into compromise, hence, entire proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for 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, the proceedings of SST No. 1078 of 2018 (Devi Singh Vs. Jay Prakash and others), arising Case Crime No.14 of 2004, under Sections-147, 227, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act, Police Station-Barsana, District-Mathura, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Court (SC/ST Act), District Mathura are, hereby, quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 19.9.2022
Madhurima
