Allahabad High Court
Vinod @ Vinod Niranjan And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 25 July, 2023
Bench: Surendra Singh-I
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:148530
Court No. - 92
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20405 of 2023
Applicant :- Vinod @ Vinod Niranjan And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Jaysingh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ramesh Kumar
Hon'ble Surendra Singh-I,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of applicants in the court today is taken on record.
Heard Sri Jay Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Ramesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, 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 S.S.T. No. 223 of 2023 (Israel Khan vs. Vinod and others), arising out of Criminal Misc. (Complaint) No. 261 of 2021, under Sections 392 and 394 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, district-Lalitpur, pending in the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (D.A.A.), Lalitpur, as well as summoning order dated 18.4.2023.
It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that opposite party no. 2 has filed a complaint case no. 261 of 2023 against the accused/applicants with allegation that accused after assaulting him and his driver looted Rs. 25,000/- from him and his companion Rs. 8000/- in which accused have been summoned by the trial court, vide order dated 18.4.2023, under Sections 392 and 394 I.P.C. for facing trial. No injury injury report of complainant or his companion has been filed.
It has been alleged by the accused-applicants that the dispute is of private nature and cognizance and summoning order has been passed on the complaint filed by the complainant/opposite party no. 2.
On 21.6.2023, learned counsel for the applicants has stated at the Bar that parties have reconciled their differences and entered into a compromise.
This Court vide order dated 21.6.2023 had directed the applicants and opposite party no. 2 to appear before the concerned trial court along with certified copy of this court and file an application for verification of the agreement of settlement/compromise.
In compliance of the order of this Court dated 21.5.2023, the applicants and opposite party no. 2 have appeared before the concerned trial court along with agreement of settlement/compromise deed on 4.7.2023 and filed an application for verification of the same, which was duly verified by the trial court on 4.7.2023. Verification of compromise with order is annexed as Annexure-SA1 to the supplementary affidavit.
In the order of trial Court, dated 4.7.2023, it is clearly mentioned that opposite party no. 2/complainant Israel Khan and accused persons Vinod @ Vinod Niranjan and Shubham @ Shubham Niranjan have appeared before the trial court along with their counsels and produced the agreement of settlement/compromise. As per statement of learned counsel for the applicants, the co-accused Sitaram Niranjan has died and copy of his death certificate is also filed.
Since applicants, Vinod @ Vinod Niranjan and Shubham @ Shubham Niranjan and opposite party no. 2, Israel Khan have amicably settled the dispute and have mutually compromised in the matter. There is no dispute left out any more in between the parties and informant/opposite party no. 2 does not want to pursue the case against applicants. 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 and the compromise deed filed by them have been verified by the trial Court, 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), the proceeding of S.S.T. No. 223 of 2023 (Israel Khan vs. Vinod and others), arising out of Criminal Misc. (Complaint) No. 261 of 2021, under Sections 392 and 394 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, district-Lalitpur, pending in the Court of Addl. District & Sessions Judge/Special Judge (D.A.A.), Lalitpur, as well as summoning order dated 18.4.2023, is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 25.7.2023
Faridul
