Allahabad High Court
Sanjay Dubey And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 6 May, 2025
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72902
Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19578 of 2021
Applicant :- Sanjay Dubey And Another
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Kundan Rai
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Deepak Kaushik,G.A.
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Shri Kundan Rai, learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Kirti Singh, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent no.1 and Deepak Kaushik, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
2. This application u/s 482 has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the cognizance taken upon the charge-sheet dated 23.11.2012 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.849 of 2012 (State Vs. Sanjay Dubey and other) arising out of Case Crime No.515 of 2012, u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Tarwa, District Azamgarh, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Court No.22, Azamgarh, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 04.08.2022, the following order was passed:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, and perused the record.
By way of the instant application, the applicants have sought for quashment of the entire proceedings and its consequences ensued thereon on the basis of cognizance taken on charge-sheet dated 23.11.2012 in Case No. 849 of 2012 (State vs. Sanjay Dubey and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 515 of 2012 under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 504 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Tarwa, District Azamgarh.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicants submits that both the parties propose to file compromise deed before the court concerned as understanding has reached between the parties to settle their dispute amicably. The claim so raised is sustained. The present compromise deed is required to be verified physically by the trial court.
In view of above, it is directed that both the parties shall appear on 17.8.2022 before the court concerned and shall present the compromise deed before it. In case, any compromise deed is so presented then physical verification of the parties shall be done and the order shall be passed by the court concerned thereon. In case any order is passed by the court concerned, the certified copy of the same shall be placed on record by way of filing affidavit by the present applicants.
List this case on 30.08.2022 in the additional cause list.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 04.08..2022, the concerned Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No.22, Azamgarh has verified the compromise vide order dated 16.08.2022. Certified copy of the aforesaid compromise verification order dated 16.08.2022 has been annexed as Annexure No.2 of the supplementary affidavit filed in the month of August, 2022 by Shri Kundan Rai, learned counsel for the applicants.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.
6. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
7. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,
(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,
(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
(v). 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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936, 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 proceedings of quashing the cognizance taken upon the charge-sheet dated 23.11.2012 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.849 of 2012 (State Vs. Sanjay Dubey and other) arising out of Case Crime No.515 of 2012, u/s 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Tarwa, District Azamgarh, pending before Judicial Magistrate, Court No.22, Azamgarh, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
11. The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 6.5.2025
Zafar
