Allahabad High Court
Javed Ahmad Khan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 26 April, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5904 of 2023
Applicant :- Javed Ahmad Khan And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Uma Nath Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants in the Court today is taken on record.
Heard Mr.Uma Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, learned A.G.A. for the State as also perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the charge-sheet dated 9th March, 2022, order dated 27th June, 2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10110 of 2022 (State Vs. Javed Ahmad Khan), arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504and 452 I.P.C., Police Station-Belharkala, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar on the basis of compromise so entered into between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties, who are known to each other very well, is purely civil and private in nature. The FIR came to be lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged. There never was any criminal intent on part of the applicant/s nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred. There are no injuries. At present, the parties to the dispute who are related to each other, have resolved their differences and made peace. In view of the settlement reached between the parties, they pray another chance be given to them to develop and experience normal relationship. The continuance of the criminal trial may in fact hamper the otherwise good chance of the parties enjoying a normal relationship. In such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charges against the applicant.
In the above regard, a compromise has been entered into between the parties. Thereafter the applicants have approached this Court by means of the present application for quashing the aforesaid case in terms of compromise entered into between the parties. This Bench passed following order on 23rd February, 2023:
"Heard Mr. Uma Nath Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 9th March, 2022, order dated 27th June, 2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10110 of 2022 (State Vs. Javed Ahmad Khan), arising out of Case Crime No. 223 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504 and 452 I.P.C., Police Station-Belharkala, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar.
It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that applicants and opposite party no.2 are known to each other and theCriminal Case No. 10110 of 2022 (State Vs. Javed Ahmad Khan), arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504and 452 I.P.C., Police Station-Belharkala, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar dispute between the parties is due to some misunderstanding. 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 compromise and opposite party no.2 does not want to continue the criminal proceedings initiated by him against the applicant, a copy of the compromise deed has been enclosed as Annexure-7 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 matter on 26th April, 2023 as fresh before the appropriate Bench.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise deed along with an application before the court below within a week from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. On submission of the same, the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, after ensuring the presence of both the parties 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 applicants in the aforesaid criminal case. "
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that in compliance of the order of this Court dated 1st March, 2023 the court below has verified the said compromise vide order dated 1st March, 2023, copies of the compromise deed and verification order have been enclosed as S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed today.
Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He also 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 criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10110 of 2022 (State Vs. Javed Ahmad Khan), arising out of Case Crime No. 221 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504and 452 I.P.C., Police Station-Belharkala, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 26.4.2023
Sushil/-
