Allahabad High Court
Shiv Kumar Rai And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 March, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39873 of 2022
Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Rai And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Despite service of notice, opposite party no.2 has not appeared before this Court personally or through counsel, meaning thereby he does not want to contest the present case.
Heard Mr. Pavan Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the materials on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No.83/2010 (State Vs. Vashishth Rai and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 126 of 2005 (State Vs. Ashok Kumar Rai and others), under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act, Police Station Ghosi, District Mau, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau as well as charge-sheet dated 24.09.2005 and cognizance order dated 17.11.2005 on the basis of compromise.
On 13.10.2022, a coordinate Bench of this Court has passed following order:-
"Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned Counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled outside the Court by way of entering into compromise which is on record. It is further submitted that since the dispute has been settled outside the Court by the parties, the proceedings impugned are liable to be quashed in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court passed in the case of "Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujrat (2017) 9 SCC 641".
Learned A.G.A. has no objection if the proceedings are quashed provided the compromise is first verified by the competent Court.
In view of the above the parties are directed to appear before the learned trial court on 11.11.2022 along with the copy of original compromise 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.
For a period of two month, the proceedings of SST No 83 of 2010 (State Vs. Vasshishth Rai and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 126 of 2005 (State Vs. Ashok Kumar Rai and others), under Section 323/34, 325/34, 504,506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X of SC/ST Act, 1989, Police Station Ghosi District Mau pending in the court of learned Special Judge S.C./S.T. Act, Mau as well as the charge sheet dated 24.09.2005 shall be kept in abeyance.
In view of the above, the petition is disposed of.
Liberty to the parties is granted to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings on the basis of compromise and its verification.
Office is directed to return the original compromise to learned counsel for the petitioners as per Rules of the Court."
Pursuant to the above order, the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau, vide order dated 11.11.2022 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. In the order of the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau, vide order dated 11.11.2022. Certified copies of the order of the Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau, vide order dated 11.11.2022 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure No.5 to this application.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are liable to be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. for the State has also not denied the aforesaid facts and submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of S.S.T. No.83/2010 (State Vs. Vashishth Rai and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 126 of 2005 (State Vs. Ashok Kumar Rai and others), under Sections 323/34, 325/34, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(X) SC/ST Act, Police Station Ghosi, District Mau, pending in the court of learned Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Mau as well as charge-sheet dated 24.09.2005 and cognizance order dated 17.11.2005, are hereby quashed.
It is also made clear that in case the victim/ opposite party has received compensation under the provisions of S.C./S.T. Act, he shall return the same to the authority concerned.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 1.3.2023
Abhishek Singh
