Ranjeeta And 5 Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 20477 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:155909
 
Court No. - 87
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36692 of 2013
 

 
Applicant :- Ranjeeta And 5 Ors.
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Yadav,Sunil Kumar Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 

 
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

1. Sri J.P. Yadav, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama alongwith short counter affidavit of Sri Anil Kumar on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri J.P. Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 175 of 2013, arising out of Case Crime No. 271 of 2012, under Section 312 IPC, Police Station- Naugawan Sadat, District- Amroha.

4. Case was heard on 2.3.2023, Court has directed to verify the compromise deed entered between the parties.

5. Pursuant to the order of this Court dated 2.3.2023, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha has submitted its report on 11.7.2023 verifying the compromise deed entered between the parties.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the present matter relates to matrimonial dispute. He next submitted that now compromise has been entered between the parties and presently they are living together and out of their wedlock, they are having three children. He lastly submitted that in light of aforesaid facts, proceedings may be quashed.

7. Sri J.P. Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashok Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has supported the case of applicants on the basis of short counter affidavit and also submitted that in case aforesaid proceeding is quashed, he would have no objection.

7. In view of above, the applicants and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

8. Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the judgement of the Apex Court reported in J.T. 2008(() SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another), as well as judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab) and reported in (2014) Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

9. The present application is, accordingly allowed. No order as to costs.

Order Date :- 3.8.2023

Junaid