Allahabad High Court
Yuvraj Singh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy ... on 23 March, 2023
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Court No. - 13
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2598 of 2022
Applicant :- Yuvraj Singh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Pratap Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
Sri Shailendra Pathak, Advocate filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State as well as counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.
This application u/s 482 CrPC has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 3.3.2022 passed by Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Gonda in Complaint Case No. 3312 of 2021, whereby the applicant has been summoned for trial u/s 379, 504 and 506 IPC as well as quash the entire proceeding of the Complaint Case No. 3312 of 2021 pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate 2nd, Gonda.
In pursuance of earlier order dated 12.5.2022 and 11.7.2022 the matter between the parties was referred in Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and as per mediation report mediation completed and agreement arrived between the parties.
At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise by means of settlement agreement dated 27.2.2023 done before the medication and conciliation centre of this Court, which is available on record.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for applicant or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid are quashed.
Learned counsel for applicant in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicant and opposite party no. 2 have settled through compromise their private and civil disputes and as such opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise/settlement agreement entered into between the parties and taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise/settlement agreement between the parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra), the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present petition u/s 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed.
Order of this Court to be communicated to the learned trial court for necessary compliance.
Order Date :- 23.3.2023
Arpan
