Allahabad High Court
Sher Bahadur Singh And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 February, 2023
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 985 of 2021
Applicant :- Sher Bahadur Singh And Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Rishad Murtaza,Dheerendra Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Neeraj Singh
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
By means of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the petitioners have prayed following reliefs:-
"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to set aside summoning order dated 08.02.2017 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Unnao in Criminal Complaint Case No. 1159 of 2015, under Section 323, 504, 506 and 436 IPC, Police Station Ajgain, District Unnao, Police Station and entire proceedings of aforesaid case as well as impugned order dated 13.1.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No. 1, Unnao whereby revision preferred by the applicants has also been dismissed."
At the very outset, learned counsel for petitioners has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise (by means of compromise deed dated 28.09.2022), which has been verified by the court below on 28.09.2022 in compliance of order passed by this Court on 22.09.2022 in Case:- U/s 482/378/407 No. 985 of 2021.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for petitioners or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid are quashed.
Learned counsel for petitioners in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the petitioners and opposite party no. 2 have settled through compromise their disputes and as such opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the petitioners. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the petitioners and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between the parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 6.2.2023
Virendra
