Allahabad High Court
Saleem And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 16 May, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:88592
Court No. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10720 of 2024
Applicant :- Saleem And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Puneet Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.
Sri Arvind Prabodh Dubey, learned counsel has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No. 2 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 12.11.2021, cognizance order dated 11.05.2023 and entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 26156 of 2023 (State Vs. Manjoor Ali and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0301 of 2021, under Sections 143, 434, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Geeda, District-Gorakhpur on the basis of the compromise dated 30.11.2023.
At the very outset, it has been submitted by learned counsel for the parties that pursuant to the order dated 16.11.2023 passed by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 41953 of 2023, the parties have appeared before the court concerned and the same has been duly verified by Judicial Magistrate-III, Gorakhpur on 29.01.2024.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the present dispute arises out of personal discord between the applicants the opposite party No. 2. It is also argued that the opposite party No. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter pending in the Court concerned and, therefore, the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties.
Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 admits the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and states that he has no objection if the impugned proceeding pending against the applicants is quashed.
Learned A.G.A. also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the parties.
The law with regard to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled.
Even the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Constitutional Bench Judgment in Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and Another, (2012)10 SCC 303, has held that "But the criminal cases having overwhelmingly and pre-dominatingly civil flavour stand on different footing for the purposes of quashing, particularly the offences arising from commercial, financial, mercantile, civil, partnership or such like transactions or the offences arising out of matrimony relating to dowry, etc. or the family disputes where the wrong is basically private or personal in nature and the parties have resolved their entire dispute. In this category of cases, High Court may quash criminal proceedings if in its view, because of the compromise between the offender and victim, the possibility of conviction is remote and bleak and continuation of criminal case would put accused to great oppression and prejudice and extreme injustice would be caused to him by not quashing the criminal case despite full and complete settlement and compromise with the victim."
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Parbatbhai Ahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others, vs. State of Gujarat and another, (2017) 9 SCC 641 has laid down broad principles of quashing the criminal proceedings in exercise of inherent jurisdiction on the ground that "even in the non compoundable cases on the basis of compromise, criminal proceedings can be quashed so that valuable time of the court can be saved and utilized in other material cases."
Both the parties have agreed to withdraw the proceedings pending amongst them in Court concerned. From perusal of the records and the law as cited above, the present case is a good case for exercise of power by the Court to quash charge-sheet, cognizance order as well as entire proceedings.
The dispute appears to be purely of a personal nature that has been mutually settled between the parties to their entire satisfaction, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in allowing the prosecution to continue any longer.
In view of the above, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 26156 of 2023 (State Vs. Manjoor Ali and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 0301 of 2021, under Sections 143, 434, 427, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station-Geeda, District-Gorakhpur, are hereby quashed.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 16.5.2024/Shivani
