Allahabad High Court
Dr. Ritesh Ranjan And Another vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 16 May, 2023
Bench: Mohd. Faiz Khan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:106778
Court No. - 81
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 1530 of 2023
Appellant :- Dr. Ritesh Ranjan And Another
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
Counsel for Appellant :- Santosh Tripathi,Mandvi Tripathi
Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rohit Nandan Pandey
Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Heard Mrs. Mandvi Tripathi, learned counsel for the appellants as well as Sri Rohit Swaroop holding brief of Sri Rohit Nandan Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and learned A.G.A. for State and perused the record.
The instant Criminal Appeal under Section 14-A(1) of the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 has been moved by the appellants- Dr.Ritesh Ranjan and Smt. Rolly with the prayer to allow the criminal appeal, set aside the impugned order dated 27.02.2020 passed by Special Judge (S.C/S.T Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in Complaint Crime No. 09 of 2019 (Har Charan vs. Ritesh Ranjan & others) under Sections 323/34, 504 & 506 IPC & 3(1)(10) of S.C/S.T Act, Police Station- Indirapuram, District- Ghaziabad as well as to quash the entire proceeding in Complaint Case No. 09 of 2019 (Har Charan vs. Ritesh Ranjan & others) under Sections 323/34, 504 & 506 IPC & 3(1)(10) of S.C/S.T Act, Police Station- Indirapuram, District- Ghaziabad pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C/S.T. Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the appellants as well as learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos. 2 to 4 jointly submits that it is due to some misunderstanding the complaint case was filed by the opposite party no.2 against the appellants, however, during the pendency of the proceedings the parties have amicably settled the dispute by entering into a compromise and terms of the compromise which were reduced into writing and was filed before this Court vide order dated 28.03.2023 and directed the parties to appear before the Special Court for the purpose of verification of such compromise.
It is further submitted that in pursuance of the order of this Court, the parties have appeared before the Special Court and have acknowledged the terms of the compromise and in this regard a report has also been prepared by the Special Court by passing order dated 13.04.2023 and certified copy of the compromise deed as well as the verification report along with the acknowledgement statements of all the parties have been filed through the supplementary dated 03.05.2023.
It is also submitted that since the dispute between the parties were of minor criminal offence and the same has been settled amicably, the pendency of the proceedings before the Special Court may generate another round of litigation between the parties and as the society or public at large is not having any stake in the dispute which is purely of private in nature, the proceedings of the case pending Court below be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. has also not disputed, the submission made on behalf of the parties as the dispute is pertaining to the minor criminal offences and has been amicably settled.
Having heard learned counsel for parties and having perused the record, it is evident that the dispute which was purely of private nature, wherein the society or public at length was not having any stake or interest has been amicably settled between the parties. The compromise has been verified by Special Court and report of the Special Court has also been filed by appellant by filing supplementary affidavit.
Having regard to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Ram Avtar Vs. State of M.P.'; MANU/SC/0967/2021 : AIR 2021 SC 5228, the disputes pertaining to Penal of Sections of S.C./S.T. Act may also be settled through compromise.
Thus, having regard to the law laid down in the judgment of Supreme Court in 'Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2012)10 SCC 303, Shiji and others Vs. Radhika and others Manu/ SC/1341/2011, Manoj Sharma Vs. State of U.P. (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014)6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jhakhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai, Bhimsingh Bhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujrat (2017)9 SCC 641, MANU/SC/1241/2017, State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narain and others (2019)5 SCC 688, Arun Singh and others vs. State of U.P. (2020)3 SCC 736, Daxaben vs. The State of Gujrat and others SLP Criminal No. 1132-1155 of 2022 decided on 29.07.2022, the impugned order dated 27.02.2020 passed by Special Judge (S.C/S.T Act)/Additional District & Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad in Complaint Case No. 09 of 2019 (Har Charan vs. Ritesh Ranjan & others) under Sections 323/34, 504 & 506 IPC & 3(1)(10) of S.C/S.T Act, Police Station- Indirapuram, District- Ghaziabad as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case are, hereby, set aside/quashed.
In result, the appeal is allowedand the impugned summoning order as well as all the proceedings of the above-mentioned case pending before the Special Court is hereby quashed/set aside.
Order Date :- 16.5.2023
Imtiyaz
