Allahabad High Court
Lakhvinder And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 August, 2024
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:124302
Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22561 of 2024
Applicant :- Lakhvinder And 2 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Amarjeet Choudhary,Rajesh Yadav
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.
2 1. Heard Mr. Amarjeet Choudhary, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Abhay Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned AGA for the State.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.06.2023 as welll as entire proceeding of Case No.735 of 2023 (State vs. Lakhvinder Singh and others), arising out of case crime no.0142 of 2023, under Sections 419 and 420 I.P.C., P.S. Bilaspur, District Rampur, on the basis of compromise 14.02.2024/15.02.2024dated between the parties.
4. Initially, on 18.01.2024, the following order was passed by co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 No.46823 of 2023 (Lakhvinder And 2 Others vs. State of U.P. and Another):-
"1. Vakalatnama, on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and supplementary affidavit filed by counsel for the applicants, are taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Abhay Pratap Singh, counsel for the opposite party no.2.
3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 24.6.2023 registered as case crime no. 0142 of 2023, under Sections 419 and 420 I.P.C., P.S. Bilaspur, District Rampur as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 30.9.2023 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, district Rampur, on the basis of compromise between the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants and the opposite party no.2 have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of compromise deed dated 30.5.2023 has been annexed as Annexure S.A.-4 to this supplementary affidavit wherein it has been mentioned that opposite party no.2 does not want to press the case. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the Court concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law.
5. Counsel for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him.
6. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the concerned court, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.
7. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, both the parties are directed to appear before the Court concerned along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. It is expected that the concerned Court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not?
8. The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
9. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
10. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."
5. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 18.01.2024, compromise between the parties has been verified by the court below vide order dated 15.02.2024. Certified copy of the compromise verification order has been placed on page-57 of the application.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
7. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
8. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
(v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
9. 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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the 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 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.
11. Accordingly, the proceedings of charge-sheet dated 24.06.2023 and Case No.735 of 2023 (State vs. Lakhvinder Singh and others), arising out of case crime no.0142 of 2023, under Sections 419 and 420 I.P.C., P.S. Bilaspur, District Rampur, on the basis of compromise dated 14.02.2024/15.02.2024 between the parties, are hereby quashed.
12. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 1.8.2024
Rahul.
