Allahabad High Court
Chanchal And Another vs State Of U.P.And Another on 20 April, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44946 of 2013
Applicant :- Chanchal And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- I.M.Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Rajvendra Singh
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed in the Court today on behalf of the applicants, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, 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 proceeding of criminal case no.16 of 2013 (VIjay Singh Vs. Amit Kumar and others), u/s 323, 392 IPC and Section 3(1)10 SC/ST Act, pending in the court of C.J.M. Amroha.
On 02.03.2023, the Court has passed following order:
"Heard the learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quash the proceeding of Criminal Case no. 16 of 2013, (Vijay Singh vs Amit Kumar & Ors) under Sections 323, 392 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) 10 SC/ST Act, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that applicant and opposite party no.2 are known to each other very well and the dispute between the parties is civil in nature which arose due to money and land dispute. 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, a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure SA-1 to the affidavit accompanying the present application. 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.
List this case on 20.04.2023 in the additional cause list.
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. After ensuring presence of both the parties, the concerned court below 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.
Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within three weeks from today.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid criminal case."
Pursuant to the above order, the learned C.J.M. Amroha vide order dated 23.03.2023 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the learned C.J.M. Amroha vide order dated 23.03.2023 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure nos. 1 and 2 of the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the applicants 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.
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 proceedings of Criminal Case no. 16 of 2013, (Vijay Singh vs Amit Kumar & Ors) under Sections 323, 392 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) 10 SC/ST Act, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha are hereby quashed.
It is also made clear that in case the victim/ opposite party has received compensation under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act, the same shall be returned to the authority concerned before filing of the compromise application before the court below.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 20.4.2023
Anurag/-
