Allahabad High Court
Ahad Alias Munna And 2 Anothers vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 March, 2025
Author: Rajeev Misra
Bench: Rajeev Misra
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:40090
Court No. - 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44135 of 2024
Applicant :- Ahad Alias Munna And 2 Anothers
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan,Zeeshan Khan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Km. Ashra,Obaidur Rahman Khan
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Samiuzzaman Khan, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Miss Ashra, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2.
2. Perused the record.
3. Applicants-Ahad @ Munna and 2 Others, who are charge sheeted accused and facing trial before Court below, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow the present application and quash the entire criminal proceedings of Session Trial No. 170 of 2017 (Old Case No. 283 of 2017) (State) Versus Ahad @ Munna and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2017, Under Section 376, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District-Deoria and Charge Sheet No. A-101 of 2017, dated 27.07.2017 Under Section 376, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. against the Applicant No. 1 and Under Section 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. against the Applicant No. 2 and 3, Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District-Deoria as well as Cognizance Order dated 31.07.2017 and Summoning Order dated 31.07.2017 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate District-Deoria and pending in the Court of Judge/Fast Additional District and Sessions Track Court-II, District-Deoria as compromise affidavit dated 16.10.2024 have been executed by both the parties.
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court may graciously be pleased to stay the further proceeding of entire Session Trial No. 170 of 2017 (Old Case No. 283 of 2017) (State Versus Ahad @ Munna and Others) arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2017, Under Section 376, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C, Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District-Deoria and Charge Sheet No. A-101 of 2017, dated 27.07.2017 Under Section 376, 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. against the Applicant No. 1 and Under Section 323, 504 and 506 I.P.C. against the Applicant No. 2 and 3, Police Station Rampur Karkhana, District-Deoria as well as Cognizance Order dated 31.07.2017 and Summoning Order dated 31.07.2017 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate District-Deoria and pending in the Court of Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court-II, District-Deoria as compromise affidavit dated 16.10.2024 have been executed by both the parties, during the pendency of present application before this Hon'ble Court, otherwise the Applicants will suffer irreparable loss and injury.
And/Or to pass any other suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during pendency of aforementioned Sessions Trial before Court below, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the Court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Accordingly, compromise affidavit dated 16.10.2024 was prepared and filed before Court below. Copy of same is on record at page 177 of the paper book. By means of aforesaid compromise application dated 16.10.2024 jointly filed by the parties before Court below, it was prayed that the proceedings of aforementioned Sessions Trial be terminated in view of the compromise entered into by the parties.
5. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicants submits that no useful purpose shall now be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of accused-applicants. Once the parties have entered into a compromise, the chances of conviction of accused-applicants are not only remote but also bleak. As such, the impugned criminal proceedings pending against accused-applicants before Court below are, therefore, liable to be quashed by this Court.
6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed the present application. Learned A.G.A. submits that since applicants are charge sheeted accused and facing trial before Court below for an offence under Sections 376, 323, 504, 506 IPC, therefore, the criminality alleged to have been committed by accused-applicants is not private in nature but against society. Referring to the judgment of Surpeme Court in the case of Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR online 2019 SC 1716, the learned A.G.A. submits that the Apex Court has itself prohibited compromise in matters relating to rape and sexual assault. On the above conspectus, the learned A.G.A., therefore, submits that the compromise, if any, entered into by the parties, is of no consequence. As such, the present application is liable to be dismissed by this Court.
7. On the other hand, Miss Ashra, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 does not oppose the present application. She submits that she has received instructions not to oppose the present application. According to the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2, it is an admitted fact that during pendency of aforementioned Sessions Trial, the parties amicably settled their disputed and entered into a compromise. The compromise so entered into by the parties was acted upon and consequently, a joint application dated 16.10.2024 was filed by the parties before Court below with the prayer that in view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the proceedings of above-mentioned Sessions Trial be terminated. She, therefore, contends that she has no objection, in case, the present application is decided by this Court taking into consideration, the above-mentioned facts.
8. When confronted with the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the learned counsel for applicants could not overcome the same.
9. Having heard, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1, the learned counsel representing first informant-opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are clearly borne out from the record and furthermore, the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicants with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.
10. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.
11. It is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 19.3.2025
Vinay
