Allahabad High Court
Rachpal Kaur Lamba And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 April, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7054 of 2016
Applicant :- Rachpal Kaur Lamba And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamlesh Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Second supplementary affidavit filed today in the Court on behalf of applicant no. 1, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant no. 1, Sri K.K. Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the materials on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the impugned summoning order dated 10.03.2015 as well as the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9002 of 2014 (State of U.P. through Ram Bhawan Nishad Vs. Ravindra Pratap Singh), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Cantt. Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur.
On 24.03.2023, the Court has passed following order:-
"Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he may be permitted to delete the name of applicant no. 2 in the array of parties as he does not want to pursue this application.
Accordingly, learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to delete the name of applicant no. 2 today itself and this application is treated to have been filed on behalf of applicant no. 1 only.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant no. 1 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 10.03.2015 as well as the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9002 of 2014 (State of U.P. through Ram Bhawan Nishad Vs. Ravindra Pratap Singh), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Cantt. Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur on the basis of compromise so entered into between the parties.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that both the parties are known to each other very well and the dispute between them is due to land and money. He further submits that on account of intervention of well-wishers of the applicants and opposite party no.2, they have settled their disputes and arrived at a compromise. On the basis of said compromise, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 before the court below that he does not want to press the criminal proceedings initiated by him against the applicant. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.
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.
Put up this case on 15.04.2023 before the appropriate Bench.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise application before the court below within a week 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, on 03.04.2023 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.
Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours.
Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within a week from today.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicant no. 1 in the aforesaid case."
Pursuant to the above order, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur vide order dated 04.04.2023 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties including applicant no. 1. Certified copies of the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur dated 04.04.2023 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure nos. SA-1 and SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the applicant no. 1 submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been verified by the concerned Magistrate, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings in 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,
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 case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9002 of 2014 (State of U.P. through Ram Bhawan Nishad Vs. Ravindra Pratap Singh), under Section 406 I.P.C., Police Station Cantt. Gorakhpur, District Gorakhpur, pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Gorakhpur are hereby quashed only in respect of applicant no. 1 i.e. Rachpal Kaur Lamba.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 17.4.2023
SK Srivastava
