Allahabad High Court
Ujma And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 January, 2023
Bench: Sadhna Rani (Thakur)
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30254 of 2022
Applicant :- Ujma And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikas Srivastava,Ravi Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Sadhna Rani (Thakur),J.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
By means of this application under section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants seek to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of this court to quash the entire proceedings of Case no. 146 of 2022, State Vs. Ujma and others), arising out of case crime no. 196 of 2021, under sections 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Sikandra Rao District Hathras on the basis of the compromise dated 16.8.2022 made between the parties.
Learned counsel for the parties submits that the parties have reached at a compromise in the case. The verification order of the trial court is on record along with compromise deed. The dispute was between the applicants and her in-laws. This court has received the certified copy of the compromise deed and original order of the trial court passed thereon verifying the compromise between the parties. As the parties have reached at a compromise and dispute is between the family members, the compromise will not affect the society at large. The verified compromise be accepted.
Learned counsel for the opp. party no. 2 is also agreed with the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicants. The compromise deed and the verification order passed thereon by the trial court are placed before the court.
As the learned counsel for the parties are present before the court and admitted the fact that the parties being relatives have amicably settled their dispute and compromise deed has been verified by the trial court. The compromise deed and the verification order passed thereon are before the court. In Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [ 2013 (83) ACC 278] and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 as well as in various other judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that the compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offence. The parties are not criminals, the dispute is between the family members and they have reached at a compromise, their compromise is verified by the trial court. The compromise is accepted. The compromise deed and the verification order passed thereon shall form part of the present order.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, no useful purpose would be served keeping the proceedings pending of the aforesaid case. Hence, the entire proceedings of Case no. 146 of 2022, State Vs. Ujma and others), arising out of case crime no. 196 of 2021, under sections 323, 324, 504, 506 I.P.C., police station Sikandra Rao District Hathras is hereby quashed.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.
Order Date :- 9.1.2023
Gss
