Allahabad High Court
Salamat Khan 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. - 4404 of 2023
Applicant :- Salamat Khan And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Azhar Hussain
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Sri A.Z. Khan, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 in the Court today, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and Mr. A.Z. Khan, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as perused the materials on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 8 of 2017 (State Vs. Salamat Khan and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra, pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-II, Agra.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the dispute between the parties is matrimonial in nature they have entered into a compromise after that they have filed a compromise deed along with an application before the Court below on 24.02.2021. The said compromise has been accepted and verified by the Civil Judge (Junior Division) F.T.C.-I, Agra, copies of which have been enclosed as annexure 7 to the affidavit accompanying the present 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 concerned Magistrate, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he 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 proceeding of Criminal Case No. 8 of 2017 (State Vs. Salamat Khan and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra, pending in the Court of learned Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)-II, Agra are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 1.3.2023
SK Srivastava
