Allahabad High Court
Rehmat Khan And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 November, 2024
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:175159
Court No. - 73
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27605 of 2024
Applicant :- Rehmat Khan And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kuldeep Kumar Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Kuldeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 27.06.2016 and cognizance/summoning order dated 24.08.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.5229 of 2016 (State vs. Rehmat Khan and others), arising out of Case Crime No.121 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Shahganj, District-Agra, pending before the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra on the basis of compromise.
3. Earlier on 12.09.2024, the following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge-sheet dated 27.06.2016 and cognizance/summoning order dated 24.08.2016, of criminal case no. 5229 of 2016, arising out of case crime no. 121 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Shahganj, District Agra, pending in the court of S.C.J.M., Agra, in terms of the compromise arrived at between the parties.
It is submitted that on account of intervention of the well-wishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise has already been filed before the trial court concerned. It is further submitted that proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.
Whether a compromise has taken place or not can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.
Learned counsel for the parties undertake to ensure their presence before the trial court concerned or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 23.09.2024 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court by the next date.
Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order before the court concerned on the date fixed before it.
Put up as fresh on 24.10.2024.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. "
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report regarding verification of compromise deed has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 23.10.2024. A letter of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra dated 19.10.2024 has been placed alongwith copy of order dated 19.10.2024 vide which compromise has been verified in the presence of the parties alongwith their respective counsels.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
6. Learned A.G.A. for the State does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, they have no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
7. Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,
8. In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
10. Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 27.06.2016 and cognizance/summoning order dated 24.08.2016 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.5229 of 2016 (State vs. Rehmat Khan and others), arising out of Case Crime No.121 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Shahganj, District-Agra, pending before the court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra is hereby quashed.
11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud.
13. A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 6.11.2024
Jitendra/-
