Allahabad High Court
Sri Niwas And 3 Others vs State Of U.P.And Another on 10 April, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5131 of 2022
Applicant :- Sri Niwas And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Avinash Kumar Tripathi,Anand Pal Singh,Harish Chandra Singh,Harish Kumar Tripathi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar,Nagendra Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Anand Pal Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Dharmendra Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
On 08.03.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The applicants, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the charge sheet as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4615 of 2020 (State Vs. Sriniwas and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1199 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 506, 465, 193 IPC, PS - Kotwali Padrauna, District - Kushinagar. A further prayer for interim relief has also been made in this application.
The learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties do not want to litigate any further and they have compromised their dispute; a copy of the compromise deed has been filed by them before the trial court and the verification of the said compromise has not been done by the trial court so far, a photocopy of the compromise is annexed at page No. 73 of the paper book of this application, Annexure No. 4. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that a direction may be issued by this Hon'ble Court to the trial court to get the said compromise verified. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants are on bail in the aforesaid criminal case.
After hearing the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants and having gone through the compromise arrived at between the parties, a case for issuing direction to the trial court to verify the said compromise deed is made out.
Accordingly, the applicants are directed to file a certified copy of this order along with a copy of the compromise deed before the trial court within twenty days and the trial court will proceed to verify the said compromise deed within two months thereafter and trial court will send its report to this Court.
List this matter on 10.05.2022. "
In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise verification report received from learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, Padrauna, is kept on record as is evident from office report dated 10.04.2023. A letter of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, dated 16.02.2023 has been placed along with compromise deed as well as order dated 16.02.2023 vide which compromise has been verified by the Court below in presence of the parties along with their respective counsels.
Learned counsel for the parties submit that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the Court concerned, the 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 the opposite party no.2 also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, they has 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 entire proceedings of charge sheet dated 29.05.2018 as well as Criminal Case No. 4615 of 2020 (State Vs. Sri Niwas and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 1199 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 506, 465, 193 I.P.C., PS - Kotwali Padrauna, District - Kushinagar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kushinagar, Padrauna, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 10.4.2023
Rahul.
