Allahabad High Court
Zeba Faizan Alias Jeba And Others vs State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home ... on 10 May, 2024
Author: Renu Agarwal
Bench: Renu Agarwal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:36142
Court No. - 29
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4343 of 2024
Applicant :- Zeba Faizan Alias Jeba And Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Arshad Ahsan Siddiqui
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.
Sri Prabhat Kumar Singh Arun, has filed vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
By means of the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing charge sheet No. 410 of 2019 dated 09.07.2019 relating to FIR o. 55 of 2019 under Section 419, 420 IPC Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Raebareli and also to quash the impugned cognizance/ summoning order dated 20.08.2019 passed in Criminal Case No. 3687 of 2019 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli and further to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 3687 of 2019 pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raebareli.
It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that the parties have entered into a compromise and amicably settled their dispute and opposite party no. 2 has filed an application before the court below to that effect on 07.10.2023 a copy of which has been annexed as annexure-5 to the present application but the same is still pending as is evident from the order-sheet of the court below copy of which has been annexed with the present application.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has admitted the fact of the compromise.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008)16 SCC1 and Nikhil Merchant vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another reported in 2008 (9) SCC 677 and has submitted that the applicant and opp. party No.2 have compromised the dispute and as such opp. party No.2 does not want to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. The opp. party No. 2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant and in view of the compromise no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties, and the dispute is between two private individuals and taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma (supra) and Nikhil Merchant (supra) that this court in exercise of its inherent power under section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceeding.
Hence, in view of the above, entire proceedings of the aforesaid case hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed.
(Renu Agarwal,J.)
Order Date :- 10.5.2024
Nadeem
