Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 14 March, 2023
Bench: Shiv Shanker Prasad
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5561 of 2023
Applicant :- Raj Kumar And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Vikrant Gupta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammed Shadan
Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and Mohammed Shadan, 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 charge-sheet dated 22.05.2022, summoning order dated 26.07.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.64 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 64 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Badgaon, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, Saharanpur on the basis of the compromise.
On 19th October, 2022, a Coordinate Bench of this Court has passed following order:
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for respondents 2 and 3 as also learned A.G.A., and perused the record.
The instant petition has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the proceedings of Case No. 754 of 2022 and charge sheet dated 22.5.2022 arising out of case crime No.64 of 2022 under sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 452 IP.C., P.S. Badgaon, district Saharanpur and summoning order dated 26.7.2022 passed by J.M., Deoband, Saharanpur.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the dispute between the parties has been amicably resolved outside the court by way of compromise which is on record. It is submitted that on the basis of the compromise, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2 and 3 concedes that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and he has no objection in case the impugned proceedings are quashed on the basis of settlement between the parties.
Learned A.G.A does not dispute the fact that the applicant No.1 and respondent No.2 have entered into compromise and the compromise has been signed by all the applicants and respondents 2 and 3.
Accordingly, having due regard to the submissions made by the parties' counsel, perusal of the compromise as also considering the law laid down by Supreme Court in (2012)10 SCC 303 Gian Singh versus State of Punjab and another, the petition is disposed of with direction to the parties to appear before the trial court on 16.11.2022 with a fresh compromise entered between all the applicants and both the respondents. The compromise shall be verified by the trial court in presence of the parties within the next one week. The trial court shall provide a copy of the verification report to the parties. A copy of compromise be placed on record of the trial court. It will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
For a period of two months, impugned proceedings shall remain in abeyance."
Pursuant to the above order, the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, Saharanpur vide order dated 22.11.2022 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, Saharanpur dated 22.11.2022 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure No.2 and 8 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 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 proceedings of charge-sheet dated 22.05.2022, summoning order dated 26.07.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No.754 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 64 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 452 I.P.C., Police Station Badgaon, District Saharanpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Deoband, Saharanpur, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 14.3.2023
Abhishek Singh
