Allahabad High Court
Jai Singh And Another vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 5 January, 2023
Bench: Shree Prakash Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 27
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36 of 2023
Applicant :- Jai Singh And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dheeraj Awasthi
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Sri Devak Vardhan,Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Devak Vardhan, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, Sri Nirmal Kumar Pandey,learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the Chargesheet contained in Annexure No. 2, as well as entire proceedings of the Special Sessions Trial (SC/ST Act) No. 262 of 2016, concerning Case Crime No. 2732 of 2014, under sections 324,504,506 I.P.C. and sections 3(1)X and 3(1) XIV of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Unnao, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 2/Special Judge, SC/ST Act, District-Unnao on the basis of compromise and amicable settlement of the dispute between the parties dated 02-01-2023.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that the instant F.I.R. has been lodged against the applicants under some misunderstanding. He further added that the applicants were not intended to open fire over the opposite party. He further submits that thereafter the applicants and opposite party no. 2 have entered into a compromise while executing a compromise deed on 02-01-2023 and they have settled their dispute amicably. Adding his arguments, he submits that the instant matter is of such nature where the objective of the act could not be contravened or diminished if the criminal proceedings are quashed on the ground of the compromise entered in between the parties. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the Judgment reported in 2021 SCC online SC 966 rendered in Case of Ramawatar Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and has referred paragraph no. 16 of the aforesaid Judgment, which is extracted hereinunder :-
"16. On the other hand, where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a ?special statute? would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482 Cr.P.C. "
Referring the aforesaid Judgment, he submits that this court has ample powers to quash the proceedings invoking jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C. and thus, he prays that the trial court may be directed to verify the compromise deed dated 02-01-2023.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 has no objection to the aforesaid rather he supports the version of the learned counsel for applicants and submits that the applicants as well as opposite party no. 2 have entered into compromise and have executed compromise deed and opposite party no. 2 has no grudge/grievance, further more.
On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.
Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the court below as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.
The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
For a period of one month, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of the of the Special Sessions Trial (SC/ST Act) No. 262 of 2016, concerning Case Crime No. 2732 of 2014, under sections 324,504,506 I.P.C. and sections 3(1)X and 3(1) XIV of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Kotwali, District-Unnao, shall remain stayed so far as applicants are concerned.
Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.
Order Date :- 5.1.2023
AKS
