Allahabad High Court
Anil Jain M.D. Niti Shree ... vs State Of U.P. And Another on 21 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:91772
Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13493 of 2012
Applicant :- Anil Jain M.D. Niti Shree Infrastructure Ltd.
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Shishir Prakash,Shad Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Mumtaz Ali
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
2. The instant application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.20931 of 2010 (State vs. Anil Jain) initiated in pursuance of charge-sheet No.604 of 2010 dated 21.11.2010, arising out of Case Crime No.1169 of 2010, under Sections 420, 406, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Sector 20 Noida, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that earlier both the parties have entered into compromise by way of filing compromise affidavit dated 12.03.2015 before the court concerned, which has been verified by learned court concerned and the compromise verification order dated 15.12.2016 has been appended through supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of the applicant, this fact has also been ascertained by 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 has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and 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 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 proceedings to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.
7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the entire proceedings of Case No.20931 of 2010 (State vs. Anil Jain), arising out of Case Crime No.1169 of 2010, under Sections 420, 406, 468, 471 I.P.C., P.S. Sector 20 Noida, District- Gautam Budh Nagar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Budh Nagar, is hereby quashed and the impugned charge-sheet No.604 of 2010 dated 21.11.2010 is hereby set-aside.
8. Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. stands allowed.
9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the supplementary affidavit preferred on behalf of the applicant. If at all, opposite party no.2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.
Order Date :- 21.5.2024
Saif
