Allahabad High Court
Shiv Murat Maurya And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 18 May, 2023
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:110723
Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14544 of 2017
Applicant :- Shiv Murat Maurya And 3 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Prakash Srivasta
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar Tewari
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard Mr. Ravindra Prakash Srivasta, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pradeep Kumar Tewari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 38 of 2008 (State Vs. Shiv Murat Maurya and others) arising out of Case Crime No. CC-23 of 2006 under sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the Court of Additional District Judge F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar.
Earlier, on 10.05.2017, the following order was passed:-
"Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2 by filing his Vakalatnama, which is being taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari learned counsel counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C., application has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 38 of 2008 (State Vs. Shiv Murat Maurya and others) arising out of Case Crime No. CC-23 of 2006 under sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the Court of Additional District Judge F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar.
It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that the private dispute between the parties has been compromised. It is thus, argued that the since the matter has been compromised between the parties, therefore, continuance of the present proceedings against the applicants is bad in law.
Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also states that the private dispute between the parties has been compromised and that the opposite party no.2 also does not want to proceed any further with the matter.
Let the said compromise be filed before the Court of Learned Additional District Judge F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar for verification, within a period of 15 days from today, who shall verify the same after issuing notices to the parties, within a period of three months, thereafter, under intimation to this Court.
Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari learned counsel counsel for the opposite party no.2 may also file counter affidavit within the aforesaid period.
List after expiry of aforesaid period.
Till the next date of listing no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants.
However in case the applicant does not file aforesaid compromise before the Learned Additional District Judge F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar, within the aforesaid period, the interim protection granted above shall automatically be vacated. "
In compliance of the aforesaid, a report regarding verification of compromise deed has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 17.12.2022. A letter of the Additional District and Sessions Judge (F.T.C.-I), Sant Kabeer Nagar, dated 30.11.2017 has been placed alongwith certified copy of order dated 17.10.2017 vide which compromise has been verified in the presence of the parties alongwith their respective counsels.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and the husband and wife have decided to separate from each other. Therefore, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-
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 criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the entire proceeding of Case No. 38 of 2008 (State Vs. Shiv Murat Maurya and others) arising out of Case Crime No. CC-23 of 2006 under sections 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station-Dhanghata, District Sant Kabir Nagar pending in the Court of Additional District Judge F.T.C.-II, Sant Kabir Nagar is hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 18.5.2023
Jitendra/-
