Allahabad High Court
Satish Kumar Pandey And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 February, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30889 of 2022
Applicant :- Satish Kumar Pandey And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Raj Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Supplementary affidavit on behalf of the applicants filed today in the Court, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceeding of complaint case no. 1186 of 2012, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sarai Inayat, District Allahabad.
On 13.10.2022, the Court has passed following order:
"Heard Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Jhamman Ram, learned AGA, for the State and perused the record of the case.
The instant application has been moved on behalf of the applicants to quash the proceedings of complaint case No.1186 of 2012, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station - Sarai Inayat, District - Allahabad pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.9, District - Allahabad on the basis of compromise executed between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that during pendency of the trial, both the parties have settled their dispute and in this regard, a compromise has been executed between them which has been annexed as Annexure No.4 to the affidavit. Opposite party No.2 also moved the application before the Court below. Therefore, the compromise executed between the parties may be verified by the court below.
He next submitted that applicants are ready to appear before the court concerned for verification of the compromise executed between them on the date fixed by this Court.
Learned AGA is having no objection if any such direction is given to the court below for verification of compromise executed between the parties.
As both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compromise has also been executed between them, therefore, it is directed that both the parties shall appear before the court concerned on 2.11.2022 and shall file an application along with the certified copy of this order for verification of compromise executed between them.
If any such application is moved, then the court below shall verify the compromise alleged to have been executed between the parties, in accordance with law, and shall transmit verification report to this Court.
List this case on 18.11.2022.
Office is directed to submit a report on the next date in respect of verification report, if any, forwarded by the court below.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
Sri Ram Raj Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants undertakes that applicants shall inform the opposite party No.2 about the order passed today for compliance."
Pursuant to the above order, the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 09, Allahabad vide order dated 07.04.2022 has recorded that both the parties have arrived at a settlement and now opposite party no. 2 does not want to prosecute the aforesaid criminal case against the applicants any further. The Court below has also opined that since the Court below has no power to quash the aforesaid criminal proceedings on the basis of aforesaid compromise as one of the charging sections i.e. Section 452 I.P.C. is non-compoundable. Therefore the Court below has rejected the application of the opposite party no. 2 to quash the entire criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been accepted by the concerned Magistrate, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case are liable to be quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of complaint case no. 1186 of 2012, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sarai Inayat, District Allahabad, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 09, Allahabad are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 27.2.2023
SK Srivastava
