Allahabad High Court
Jitendra Kumar Tripathi @ Jitendra ... vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko ... on 21 November, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:77144
Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10478 of 2024
Applicant :- Jitendra Kumar Tripathi @ Jitendra Tripathi
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Furkan Pathan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J.
Ms. Neelu Verma, Advocate has put in appearance by filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2, the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Ms. Neelu Verma, learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 as well as perused the material placed on record.
By means of the instant application, the applicant has prayed for quashing the summoning order dated 03.10.2020 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow and entire proceedings of Case No. 37952 of 2020; State of U.P. Vs. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 285 of 2019, under Sections 342, 387, 504, 323, 120B IPC, Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow, on the basis of compromise dated 18.06.2024.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that due to certain misunderstanding, the instant FIR was lodged against the applicant. He added that later on, the parties sat together and have amicably settled their disputes, which has been reduced in writing. Thereafter, the applicant filed an Application U/s 482 No. 6335 of 2024, wherein this Court vide order dated 22.07.2024 had directed the court below to verify the said compromise deed and in compliance thereof, the compromise deed was verified on 29.10.2024. He submits that now there is no dispute in between the parties and they have settled their dispute. He submits that further criminal proceedings in the instant matter would amount to harassment and, thus, the instant criminal proceedings against the applicant may be quashed.
Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 has also supported the version of the learned counsel for the applicant and submits that parties have amicably settled their dispute and the opposite party no. 2 has no grievance, hence, criminal proceedings against the applicant may be dropped.
Learned counsel for the State has no objection to the submissions aforesaid.
Considering the aforesaid submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, I find that compromise has been entered into between the parties on 18.06.2024 and said compromise has been verified on 29.10.2024 and, now, as per the statement of learned counsel for the parties, they do not want to press the aforementioned criminal proceedings against the applicant.
In view of the above, as the applicant and opposite party no. 2 have entered into compromise on 18.06.2024 and no grievance remains to be agitated and as such, further criminal proceedings in the aforementioned criminal case are liable to be set aside in view of the Judgments of the Apex Court rendered in B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2008) 9 SCC 677; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; and Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.
Resultantly, the proceedings of Case No. 37952 of 2020; State of U.P. Vs. Jitendra Kumar Tripathi and Others, arising out of Case Crime No. 285 of 2019, under Sections 342, 387, 504, 323, 120B IPC, Police Station Hazratganj, District Lucknow, are hereby quashed.
The compromise shall be part of this order.
Consequences to be followed.
The application is allowed accordingly.
Order Date :- 21.11.2024
kkv/
