Allahabad High Court
Ramanjeet Singh vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 February, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25023 of 2022
Applicant :- Ramanjeet Singh
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Bhan Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sunil Kumar Srivastava,Anand Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicant today in the Court, the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sunil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 420 of 2020, (Parneet Kaur Chhabra Vs, Ramanjeet Singh), under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-10, Kanpur Nagar.
In pursuance of the order dated 22.9.2022, the applicant has filed supplementary affidavit. In paragraph no. 3 of the supplementary affidavit it has stated that he has no any objection to finish case, which was lodged by him in Crime No. 109 of 2020, under sections 406, 420, 34, 120-B IPC, Police Station Chutiya, District Ranchi, in favour of opposite party no.2 and also stated that she has withdrawn the cases initiated by her against the applicant and others. She has no objection to finish the Complaint Case No. 420 of 2020 for which above noted case filed before this Court in favour of the applicant. The statements of the applicant and opposite party no. 2 given before the court below dated 13.9.2022 which has been annexed as annexure no. 1 to the S.A.
It is thus contended that the dispute has been settled between the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (2014) and has submitted that since the mater has been compromised between the parties amicably, hence no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution of the applicant in the present case is allowed to go on as no grievance is left to the opposite party no.2, therefore, the present case be finally decided.
In view of the fact the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter is purely of personal nature and family dispute, which has been mutually settled between the parties, in view of the compromise dated 19.7.2017, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014), Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another,J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 the proceedings of the Complaint Case No. 420 of 2020, (Parneet Kaur Chhabra Vs, Ramanjeet Singh), under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Govind Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar as well as Crime No. 109 of 2020, under sections 406, 420, 34, 120-B IPC, Police Station Chutiya, District Ranchi are hereby quashed.
The present application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 16.2.2023/A.
