Allahabad High Court
Mahesh And Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 27 May, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:96204
Court No. - 82
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19108 of 2007
Applicant :- Mahesh And Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Nitin Srivastava,G.S. Hajela,S.C. Srivastava
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate,D.N. Joshi,Kapil Tyagi
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned counsel for 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 charge-sheet dated 04.07.2007 submitted in Case No.1694 of 2007 (State vs. Mohit and Others) for offence under Section 498A I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Hapur Dehat, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Hapur, District Ghaziabad.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicants submitted that compromise has already been preferred by both the parties before the learned court concerned and the same has been verified on dated 16.05.2024, which has been appended with the supplementary affidavit filed on dated 22.05.2024, this fact has also been ascertained by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
4. The present matter is related to matrimonial dispute. 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.1694 of 2007 (State vs. Mohit and Others) for offence under Section 498A I.P.C. and Sections 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Hapur Dehat, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Hapur, District Ghaziabad, is hereby quashed and the impugned charge-sheet dated 04.07.2007 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 affidavit filed by the opposite party no.2. 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 :- 27.5.2024
Saif
