Allahabad High Court
Jitendra Sahu And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 20 September, 2023
Bench: Deepak Verma
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:182214
Court No. - 89
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29195 of 2023
Applicant :- Jitendra Sahu And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Ankit Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Tripathi
Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned counsel for opposite party no.2; learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 09.07.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 1677 of 2022, Case Crime No. 188 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that F.I.R. has been lodged by the brother of wife of applicant no. 1. The sister of opposite party no. 2 is living with applicant no.1. Both the parties have settled the dispute out of the court and agreement deed has been entered between the parties and informant does not want to proceed further on account of compromise.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, entire proceedings against the applicants be quashed.
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 and civil dispute 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 in para-2 of the short counter affidavit, it has been stated that parties have amicably settled their matrimonial dispute and she is happily residing with her husband. He further submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
8. Learned AGA 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 Sessions Case No. 1677 of 2022, Case Crime No. 188 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Sessions Judge, Kanpur Dehat, are quashed.
12. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 20.9.2023
Meenu Singh
