Allahabad High Court
Raghav Singh And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 May, 2023
Bench: Shekhar Kumar Yadav
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:111563
Court No. - 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28485 of 2021
Applicant :- Raghav Singh And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Mishra
Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.
1.Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Saurabh Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2.The present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding as well as the impugned summoning order dated 5.8.2016 in Complaint Case No. 2099 of 2016, (Smt. Reena Kumari Vs. Raghav Singh and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC. P.S. Civil Lines, District Etawah on the basis of compromise affidavit dated 5.4.2021.
3.Learned counsel for the applicant contends that the matter has been compromised between the parties and compromise deed dated 5.4.2021 has been filed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit accompanying the 482 Cr.P.C. application. The court below has sent its verification report dated 6.1.2023 which is on record. It is thus contended that the dispute has been settled between the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (2014) and has submitted that since the mater has been compromised between the parties amicably, hence no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution of the applicant in the present case is allowed to go on as no grievance is left to the opp. party no.2, therefore, the present case be finally decided.
4.Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also states that the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties and that the opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed further with the matter.
5.In view of the fact that the husband and wife do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter is purely of personal nature and family dispute, which has been mutually settled between the parties, in view of the compromise dated 5.4.2021, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
6.Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014), Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another,J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.
7.The present application is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 22.5.2023/A.
