Allahabad High Court
Santram And Others vs The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 2 May, 2024
Author: Karunesh Singh Pawar
Bench: Karunesh Singh Pawar
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:34257
Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4054 of 2024
Applicant :- Santram And Others
Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home, Lko. And Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Nafees
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mohd. Nafees, Advocate, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos.3 to 5, which is taken on record.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the impugned charge sheet dated 2.8.2018 arising out of Case Crime No.130 of 2018 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 23.1.2023 passed in Criminal Case No.2727 of 2023 (State vs. Dinesh Nishad and others) in terms of the compromise deed dated 4.3.2024 as well as verification report dated 2.4.2024 prepared by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ambedkar nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled the dispute outside the court by way of compromise dated 4.3.2024. The copy of the compromise is on record. On the basis of the said compromise, earlier the applicants have filed Application U/S 482 No.2613 of 2024 before this court in which vide order dated 19.3.2024 the matter was sent to learned trial court for verification of compromise in the presence of parties.
Further it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that in compliance of order passed by this Court, parties had appeared before the trial court, who in the presence of the parties has verified the compromise entered between the parties vide its order dated 2.4.2024. The copy of the verification report is on record as Annexure-6 to the application.
Learned counsel for respondent nos.3 to 5 concedes the argument made by learned counsel for the applicants.
Learned A.G.A. has also no objection if the impugned proceedings are quashed.
Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.
In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified by the trial court and the verification report is on record as well as considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases (supra), it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.
Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the impugned impugned charge sheet dated 2.8.2018 arising out of Case Crime No.130 of 2018 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Akbarpur, District Ambedkar Nagar as well as summoning/cognizance order dated 23.1.2023 passed in Criminal Case No.2727 of 2023 (State vs. Dinesh Nishad and others), are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 2.5.2024
Madhu
