Allahabad High Court
Sukki @ Khushilal And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 April, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18138 of 2021
Applicant :- Sukki @ Khushilal And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as perused the materials on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceedings of S.S.T. No. 615 of 2020, arising out of Complaint Case No. 257 of 2016, Smt. Jamuna vs. Kukki and others, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act, Police Station Bar, District Lalitpur, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur.
On 02.12.2021 a coordinate Bench of this Court has passed following order:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed seeking quashing the entire criminal proceedings of SST No.615 of 2020, arising out of Complaint Case No.257 of 2016, Smt. Jamuna vs. Kukki and others, under Sectios 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act, Police Station Bar, District Lalitpur, pending in the Court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur in terms of the compromise entered between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that nothing as alleged has been committed by the applicant, however, the applicants and the complainant have entered into a compromise on 08.04.2021. They have settled their dispute amicably out of the Court and have decided not to contest the case against each other. Copy of the compromise deed dated 08.04.2021 is on record as Annexure No.3 to this application.
In view of the above, the applicants as well as opposite party no.2 are directed to approach the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur by filing appropriate application for verification of the compromise within two weeks from today and the Court concerned after receiving the application shall verify the compromise in presence of the parties and submit its report to this Court within four weeks thereafter.
List this case in the week commencing 17.01.2022 in the additional cause list before the appropriate Bench.
Meanwhile, the process, if any, is found to be issued against the applicants, the same shall not be given effect to.
It is made clear that this case shall not be treated as tied up or part heard to this Bench."
Pursuant to the above order, the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur, vide order dated 22.12.2021 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur dated 22.12.2021 and the compromise have been placed along with the order sheet of the present application.
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 Judge, 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. He also undertakes that the amount, if any, given to the opposite party no. 2 as compensation under the provision of S.C./S.T. Act the same shall be returned to the authority concerned within two weeks.
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 S.S.T. No. 615 of 2020, arising out of Complaint Case No. 257 of 2016, Smt. Jamuna vs. Kukki and others, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3 (1) 10 SC/ST Act, Police Station Bar, District Lalitpur, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Lalitpur are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 21.4.2023
SK Srivastava
