Allahabad High Court
Mukesh Kansal And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:84273
Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35426 of 2011
Applicant :- Mukesh Kansal And Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kishor,Ramesh Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,Deepak Patel,Rajesh Kumar Sharma,Santosh Singh
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Ramesh Pandey, learned counsel for applicants and Sri Munna Prasad Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for State.
2. Present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred with a prayer to allow the instant application and stay the further proceedings in Case No.2925 of 2009, under Sections 427, 325 & 326 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending before the A.C.J.M-4, Ghaziabad/court concerned.
3. Learned counsel for applicants submitted that the parties had entered into compromise on dated 17.07.2023 and the same has also been verified by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.6, Ghaziabad vide order dated 06.05.2024 and this fact has been endorsed by Sri Munna Prasad Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Santosh Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and it has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.
5.A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.
6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.
7. In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of Case No.2925 of 2009, under Sections 427, 325 & 326 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali, District Ghaziabad, pending before the A.C.J.M-4, Ghaziabad/court concerned against the applicants, are hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed.
9. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.
Order Date :- 9.5.2024
A.N. Mishra
