Allahabad High Court
Prembabu And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 2 July, 2024
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:106738
Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12093 of 2021
Applicant :- Prembabu And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dharm Singh Parmar
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Abhishek Kumar Srivastava,G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Dharm Singh Parmar, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Abhishek Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 08.12.2020 as well as summoning order dated 08.02.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C., Hamirpur in Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Prembabu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.273 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Kurara, District-Hamirpur, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C., Hamirpur, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 06.05.2024, the following order was passed:-
"1. Heard Shri D.S. Parma, learned counsel for the applicant, Shri Shashidhar Pandey, learned AGA for the State and Shri Abhishek Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for o.p. no. 2 and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 614 of 2021, arising out of case crime no. 273 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Kurara, district Hamirpur on the basis of compromise.
3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the parties have amicably settled their disputes outside the Court and the opposite party no.2 does not want to prosecute the applicants. The compromise has taken place on 02-05-2023 and the compromise-deed has been annexed as Annexure-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed in support of the application.
4. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the aforesaid facts.
5. In view of above facts, the parties shall file an application along with the compromise-deed before the concerned Court below and appear before the Court concerned for verification of the compromise in the third week of May 2024. On receiving the said application the Court below shall take steps for verification of the compromise and prepare a verification report. The concerned Court shall send the verification report to this Court, which may be placed in the file.
6. List on 02-07-2024 along with report of verification of compromise.
7. Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in pursuance of the aforesaid proceedings."
4. In compliance of the order dated 06.05.2024, compromise verification report is placed on record as is evident from office report dated 01.07.2024 along with letter of Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 03.06.2024, which mentions about verification of compromise by order dated 16.05.2024. The order dated 16.05.2024 passed by First Additional Civil Judge (J.D.)/J.M., Hamirpur, has also been placed on record.
5. 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.
6. 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.
7. 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,
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Accordingly, the proceedings of charge sheet dated 08.12.2020 as well as summoning order dated 08.02.2021 passed by Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C., Hamirpur in Case No.614 of 2021 (State Vs. Prembabu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.273 of 2020, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.-Kurara, District-Hamirpur, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C., Hamirpur, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 2.7.2024
Rahul.
