Bheem Kushwaha And 4 Others vs State Of Up Others
2025 Latest Caselaw 593 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Bheem Kushwaha And 4 Others vs State Of Up Others on 6 May, 2025

Author: Manju Rani Chauhan

Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72668
 
Court No. - 52
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28135 of 2024
 

 
Applicant :- Bheem Kushwaha And 4 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of Up Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Mishra
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Om Prakash Yadav
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
 

Heard Mr. Rahul Kumar Tiwari, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sanjay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Om Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 to 4 as well as Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 24.12.2021 along with Cognizance order dated 23.03.2022 and the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No.155 of 2022 (State vs. Bheem Kushwaha & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.810 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Kasia, District- Kushi Nagar, pending in the court of learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Kushi Nagar at Padrauna, on the basis of compromise dated 17.05.2024.

On 10.09.2024, the following order was passed:-

" 1. Heard Mr. Rakesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Om Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 to 4 and Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Special Session Trial No. 155 of 2022 (State Vs. Bheem Kushwaha and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 810 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (Dha) of SC/ST Act, Police Station Kasia, District Kushi Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Kushinagar at Padrauna as well as charge-sheet dated 24.12.2021 and cognizance order dated 23.03.2022, on the basis of compromise dated 17.05.2024.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered into between the parties. The copy of the said compromise/mutual deed, filed before the court below, is annexed as Annexure No. 5 to this application. Therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would be a futile exercise and wastage of time of the Court and will be abuse of process of law. Hence, proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303.

4. Learned AGA for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

5. Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

6. In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed as well as a certified copy of this order within two week from today. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, after hearing the informant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not? The fact regarding the amount towards compensation as received and stated to be returned, shall also be verified through the concerned District Magistrate.

7. A report be called from the concerned District Magistrate whether any compensation was paid to the opposite party no.2 to 4/victim and the said amount has been returned back to the authority concerned or not.

8. Upon due verification of compromise, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.

9. Put up this case on 15.10.2024, as fresh.

10. Till then, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."

In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 10.09.2024, the compromise verification report as well as compensation report have been placed on record. The letter of District Magistrate, Kushi Nagar dated 03.10.2024 is placed on record along with the report of District Social Welfare Officer, Kushi Nagar dated 01.10.2024 mentioning therein that no compensation has been given to the victim. The letter of the concerned Court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Kushinagar at Padrauna dated 08.10.2024 has been placed on record along with order dated 08.10.2024 as is evident form office report dated 18.11.2024. Order dated 08.10.2024 shows that the aforesaid compromise has been verified in the presence of the parties along with their respective counsels. The injured witnesses have also appeared before the court concerned for verification of the compromise as is evident from the verification order dated 08.10.2024 placed on record.

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.

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 to 4 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.

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,

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.

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.

Accordingly, the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No.155 of 2022 (State vs. Bheem Kushwaha & Others), arising out of Case Crime No.810 of 2021, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 325 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)(Dha) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Kasia, District- Kushi Nagar, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.

The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith.

Order Date :- 6.5.2025

Kalp Nath Singh