Allahabad High Court
Sweta Vishwakarma And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 14 February, 2023
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 14
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6856 of 2022
Applicant :- Sweta Vishwakarma And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashok Kumar Singh,Pankaj Kumar Awasthi
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicants/petitioners, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 17.8.2022 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 9046 of 2020, under Sections 323,504,506,427 I.P.C., Police Station- Mill Area, District- Raebareli pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.), Raebareli.
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, which has been duly verified by the court concerned on 6.2.2023, which is available on record.
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 petitioner 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 private and civil disputes and as such opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the petitioner. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the petitioner 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 into 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 and 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 petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed.
Order Date :- 14.2.2023
Shravan/Virendra
