Allahabad High Court
Rahul Verma And Another vs State Of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. ... on 2 February, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 984 of 2023
Applicant :- Rahul Verma And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of Up Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home And Anr.
Counsel for Applicant :- Jay Prakash Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Sri Satyendra Kumar Tiwari, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Satyendra Kumar Tiwari, 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 proceedings of criminal case no. 6946 of 2022 as well as chargesheet dated 11-04-2021 and summoning order dated 13-04-2022 passed by the learned ACJM, Room No. 13, Pratapgarh arising out of Case Crime No. 210/2020, under sections 366,376, 506,344 I.P.C., Police Station-Mandhata, District-Pratapgarh.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the applicants are innocent and have falsely been implicated in the instant case. He further 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 13.12.2022. He next added that due to enmity the impugned F.I.R. was lodged. 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 15.12.2022 has referred the matter for compromise verification in Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 8470 of 2022 and in compliance of the aforesaid order, both the parties have appeared before the court below and the compromise deed dated 13.12.2022 has been verified in presence of all concerned parties and the order of verification was passed on 04.01.2023 by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.13, Pratapgarh. He next added that now the matter has been compromised between the parties, and as such the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 6946 of 2022(State Versus Rahul Verma) arising out of Case Crime No. 210 of 2020, under Sections 366,376,506 & 344 IPC, Police Station-Mandhata, District -Pratapgarh 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 applicant 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 applicant and submits that the parties have entered into compromise deed and now there is no dispute in between the parties and thus the criminal proceeding against the applicant 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 13.12.2022 and said compromise has been verified on 04.01.2023 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned State versus Rahul Verma, arising out of aforementioned Case Crime No.210 of 2020.
In view of the above, as the applicant and opposite party no. 2 have entered into compromise on 13.12.2022 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, proceedings of criminal case no. 6946 of 2022 as well as chargesheet dated 11-04-2021 and summoning order dated 13-04-2022 passed by the learned ACJM, Room No. 13, Pratapgarh arising out of Case Crime No. 210/2020, under sections 366,376, 506,344 I.P.C., Police Station-Mandhata, District-Pratapgarh, are hereby quashed.
The compromise deed shall be part of this order.
Consequences to be followed.
The application is allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 2.2.2023
AKS
