Allahabad High Court
Haji Anees And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 January, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43770 of 2022
Applicant :- Haji Anees And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ved Prakash Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aditya Prasad Mishra,Ashutosh Tripathi
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Mr Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the summoning order dated 10.082016 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 1926 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties.
The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably and in furtherance thereof, they have filed a compromise deed before the court below.
This Court, vide order 27.09.2022, in Application U/s 482 No. 31098 of 2022 (Haji Anees and 4 others Vs State of UP and another) has passed the following order :-
"1. Heard Sri Ved Prakash Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for State, Sri Aditya Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, who has already filed his vakalatnama in the registry, and perused the record.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1926 of 2018 (Mahrajuddin Vs. Nafeesa and others), under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506, IPC, Police Station Sardhana, District Meerut, including summoning order dated 10.08.2016, passed by learned A.C.J.M., 4TH, Meerut, in the light of the compromise entered between the parties, dated 30.07.2022.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled outside the Court by way of entering into compromise which is on record as Annexure No.9 to the affidavit filed in support of the application. It is further submitted that since the dispute has been settled outside the Court by the parties, the proceedings impugned be quashed in view of the judgment of Supreme Court in the case of "Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab" reported in "(2012) 10 SCC 303".
4. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes the argument of learned counsel for the applicants.
5. Learned A.G.A. has no objection if the proceedings are quashed provided the compromise is first verified by the competent Court.
6. In view of the above the parties are directed to appear before the learned trial court on 19.10.2022 along with the copy of a fresh deed, who shall verify the compromise in presence of the parties within one week thereafter and keep a report of the verification on the record of the Court after providing its copies to the parties.
7. For a period of two month, the proceedings of aforesaid case, shall be kept in abeyance.
8. In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
9. Liberty to the parties is granted to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings on the basis of compromise and its verification.
10. Office is directed to return the original compromise to learned counsel for the applicants as per Rules of the Court. "
Pursuant to the said order, parties appeared before the court below and the court below vide order dated 19.10.2022 verified the compromise deed filed by the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably and they have filed compromise deed before the court below.
In the present case, the sections involved are under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC.
In compliance of the aforesaid order, the court below has verified the contents and parties of the compromise deed and submitted his report dated 19.10.2022 to the extent that the parties and contents of the compromise deed are genuine and they have entered into the compromise by free-will.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal case.
Therefore, in view of the above and considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the entire proceedings of Case No. 1926 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 452, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut are hereby quashed.
Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 24.1.2023
RavindraKSingh
