Allahabad High Court
Saleem Uddin vs State Of U.P. And Another on 28 April, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20432 of 2021
Applicant :- Saleem Uddin
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Zaid
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A,Pratik J. Nagar
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Mohd. Zaid, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Pratik J. Nagar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
On 27.10.2021, the following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed seeking quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.745 of 2019, Sadaf Jahan vs. Ch. Saleem Uddin, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Amroha, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District-Amroha, on the basis of the compromise entered into the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 jointly submit that nothing as alleged has been committed by the applicant, however, the applicant and the complainant have entered into a compromise on 12.02.2021. 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 12.02.2021 is on record as Annexure No.4 to this application.
In view of the above, the applicant as well as opposite party no.2 are directed to approach the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District-Amroha 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 two weeks thereafter.
List this case in the week commencing 29.11.2021 in the additional cause list before the appropriate Bench. "
In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise verification report from Civil Judge (JD)/JM/FTC II, Amorha, has been placed on record as is evident from office report dated 16.02.2022. A letter of Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M./F.T.C. II, Amorha, dated 08.11.2021 has been placed on record along with compromise deed as well as order dated 02.11.2021 vide which compromise has been verified, in presence of the parties along with their respective counsels. Certified copy of the verification order dated 02.11.2021 has also been filed at page 8 of the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. for the State also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, he 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 Case No.745 of 2019, (Sadaf Jahan vs. Ch. Saleem Uddin), under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C. read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Amroha, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, District-Amroha, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 28.4.2023
Rahul.
