Allahabad High Court
Shikha Giri And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 29 August, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:58120
Court No. - 28
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8664 of 2023
Applicant :- Shikha Giri And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Surya Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijendra Pratap Singh
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard Sri Surya Prakash Singh,learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Brijendra Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
By means of the instant application, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the impugned the proceedings of S.T. No. 36/2019, in Case Crime No. 47 of 2019, U/s 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 16/17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Khandasa, District-Ayodhya(Faizabad) as well as chargesheet No. 113 of 2019 dated 31-03-2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 47 of 2019, under sections 363 & 366 of I.P.C. and Sections 16/17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Khandasa, District-Ayodhya(Faizabad).
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He next added that due to some misunderstanding the instant FIR was lodged and thereafter the parties sat together and they have settled their dispute and that too has been reduced in writing as a compromise deed dated 15.12.2022. He next submits that the applicant no. 2 has performed the marriage with the alleged victim namely Shikha Giri and the marriage has also been got registered and they are living with each other as husband and wife and due to certain enmity the impugned F.I.R. was lodged. He next submits that there is one child from the wedlock. Adding his arguments, he submits that now the parties have put their all disputes at rest by way of executing compromise deed and thus further criminal proceedings against the present applicant would be a futile exercise and amount to harassment of the applicants.
Adding his arguments, he also submits that this Hon'ble Court vide order dated 15.05.2023 has referred the matter for compromise verification in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 2460 of 2020 and in compliance of the aforesaid order, both the parties have appeared before the court below and the compromise deed dated 15.12.2022 has been verified in presence of all concerned parties and the order of verification was passed on 07.06.2023 by the learned Special Judge, POCSO Act, Faizabad/Ayodhya. He next added that now the matter has been compromised between the parties, and as such the proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 36 of 2019 (State of U.P. versus Mangal Gupta) arising out of Case Crime No. 47 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366 of IPC and Sections 16/17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Khandasa, District-Ayodhya(Faizabad), may be quashed.
In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on a judgment rendered in Vishwas Bhandari v. State of Punjab and another reported in (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 605, Criminal Appeal No.105 of 2021, dated 03.02.2021 and has placed reliance on paragraphs 9 and 10 and the same are extracted hereunder:-
"9. We find that the evidence of the prosecutrix and the complainant before the Court shows that there is no allegation whatsoever against the appellant. The main allegation was against Vikram Roop Rai but the prosecutrix married him on 4.8.2013 and had given birth to two children from that wedlock. In the absence of any allegation against the appellant, we find that the continuation of proceedings against him is nothing but an abuse of process of law.
10. Since there is no evidence against the appellant, the proceedings initiated against him on the basis of FIR would be untenable. The High Court was, thus, not justified in dismissing the petition against the appellant."
Referring the aforesaid, he submits that the case of the present applicants is squarely covered with the ratio of the Judgment aforesaid.
On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also supported the version of the applicants and submits that the parties have entered into compromise deed and now there is no dispute in between the parties and thus, the criminal proceedings against the applicants may be dropped.
On the other hand, learned AGA appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.
Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 15.12.2022 and said compromise has been verified on 07.06.2023 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned State versus Mangal Gupta, arising out of aforementioned Case Crime No. 47 of 2019.
In view of the above, as the applicants and opposite party no. 2 have entered into compromise on 15.12.2022 and no grievance remains to be agitated and as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgements of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation[2008)9 SCC 677]; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.
Resultantly, the proceedings of S.T. No. 36/2019, in Case Crime No. 47 of 2019, U/s 363,366 of I.P.C. and Section 16/17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Khandasa, District-Ayodhya(Faizabad) as well as chargesheet No. 113 of 2019 dated 31-03-2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 47 of 2019, under sections 363 & 366 of I.P.C. and Sections 16/17 of the Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station-Khandasa, District-Ayodhya(Faizabad), are hereby quashed.
The compromise deed shall be part of this order.
Consequences to be followed.
The application is allowed accordingly
Order Date :- 29.8.2023
AKS
