Allahabad High Court
Raj Kumar And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 17 May, 2023
Bench: Suresh Kumar Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:34436
Court No. - 13
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4865 of 2023
Applicant :- Raj Kumar And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Janendra Kumar Verma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.
1.Ms. Saroj Kumari, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 today in Court is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material available on record.
3. By means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed following reliefs:-
"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 6685 of 2022 (State Vs. Raj Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 1046 of 2021, under Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri in terms of compromise dated 30.12.2022 verified by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate."
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants has submitted that the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled and the parties have entered into a compromise (by means of compromise deed dated 30.12.2022), which has been verified by the court below on 9.5.2023.
5. Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for applicants 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.
6. Learned counsel for applicants 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 applicants 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 applicants. Opposite party no. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
7. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably and it is highly doubtful if the ingredients of the offence as alleged are made out.
8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise 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.
9. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the present 482 Cr.P.C. petition stands allowed.
Order Date :- 17.5.2023
Virendra
