Allahabad High Court
Praveen And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 October, 2023
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189672
Court No. - 89
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32792 of 2023
Applicant :- Praveen And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Bed Prakash Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kuldeep Kumar Gupta
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.1037 of 2022 (State Vs. Praveen and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.1105 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, against the applicant no. 1 to 4 and under Sections 498-A, 354, 354 Kha, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act against the applicant no. 5 and 6, P.S. Nandgram, District Ghaziabad.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of the court and an agreement was reduced in writing which has been filed as annexure-5 to the affidavit. opposite party No.2 realize that there was no criminal intent on part of the applicants and that no criminal offence has been committed by the applicants. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise dated 27.07.2023 and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, entire proceedings against the applicants be quashed.
5. It is next submitted that applicants earlier approached this Court by filing 482 Cr.P.C. Application No. 24374 of 2023 and the Court vide order dated 11.07.2023 referred the matter to the trial court to verify the compromise entered into between the parties. The trial court vide order dated 27.07.2023 submitted a report that parties appeared before the court below and they have been verified by their counsels. A report in this regard has been annexed as Annexure-7 to the application.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, and has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private 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. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the 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 case are quashed.
8. Learned AGA and counsel for the opposite party no. 2 could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
9. Considering the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble 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. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
10. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
11. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No.1037 of 2022 (State Vs. Praveen and Others) arising out of Case Crime No.1105 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, against the applicant no. 1 to 4 and under Sections 498-A, 354, 354 Kha, 323, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act against the applicant no. 5 and 6, P.S. Nandgram, District Ghaziabad, is hereby quashed.
12. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 3.10.2023
Meenu Singh
