Allahabad High Court
Rajesh Srivastava And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 24 July, 2023
Bench: Surendra Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:147546
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18650 of 2021
Applicant :- Rajesh Srivastava And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Abhay Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.
Heard Sri Abhai Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, P.P. Tiwari, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The applicant by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 434 of 2021, (State of U.P. vs. Rajesh Srivastava and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 576 of 2017, under sections 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. George Town, district-Prayagraj, pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Court no. 18, Allahabad, as well as chargesheet dated 4.8.2028 and cognizance order dated 3.8.2021.
This Court vide order dated 12.11.2021 had directed the applicants and opposite party no. 2 to approach the concerned trial court by filing appropriate application for verification of the agreement of settlement/compromise within two weeks and the Court concerned after receiving the application shall verify the compromise in presence of both the parties and submit its report to this Court within four weeks thereafter.
In compliance of the order of this Court dated 12.11.2021, the applicants and opposite party no. 2 have appeared before the concerned trial court along with agreement of settlement/compromise deed and filed an application for verification of the same, which was duly verified by the trial court on 25.11.2021. Verification of compromise with order is annexed with the file.
Since applicants, Rajesh Srivastava, Amita Srivastav and informant aggrieved opposite party no. 2, Amit Kumar Srivastava have amicably settled the dispute and have mutually compromised in the matter. According to the counsel there is no dispute left out any more in between the parties and they wish no more litigation in between them. The compromise deed filed by them has been verified by the concerned trial Court.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 states that the matter has been compromised and the opposite party no. 2 does not want to pursue the matter any further as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties and opposite party no. 2 has no objection if the present application in question is allowed and the impugned proceedings be quashed.
In view of the fact that the applicants and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, 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) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another),Criminal Case No. 434 of 2021, (State of U.P. vs. Rajesh Srivastava and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 576 of 2017, under sections 504 and 506 I.P.C., P.S. George Town, district-Prayagraj, pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Court no. 18, Allahabad, as well as chargesheet dated 4.8.2028 and cognizance order dated 3.8.2021 is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 24.7.2023
Faridul
