Premsheela And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another
2025 Latest Caselaw 7197 ALL

Allahabad High Court

Premsheela And Another vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 May, 2025

Author: Manju Rani Chauhan

Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:89424
 
Court No. - 52
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 12008 of 2025
 

 
Applicant :- Premsheela And Another
 
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Singh
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Pushpraj Yadav, Subhash Singh,G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
 

1. Heard Mr. Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Amresh Singh, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Subhash Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned counsel for the State.

2. The present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 25.06.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 30.04.2024 and entire proceedings of Session Case No.320 of 2024 (State vs. Vijyendra Narayan Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2023, under Sections 384, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S.-Karma, District-Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Sonbhadra, on the basis of compromise.

3. On 11.04.2025, the following order was passed:-

"Mr. Pushpraj Yadav, Advocate and Mr. Subhash Singh, Advocate, have filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, in Court today, which is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

Heard Mr. Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pushpraj Yadav and Subhash Singh, learned counsels for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

The present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 25.06.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 30.04.2024 and entire proceedings of Session Case No.320 of 2024 (State vs. Vijyendra Narayan Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2023, under Sections 384, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S.-Karma, District-Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Sonbhadra, on the basis of compromise.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered into between the parties. In this regard, copy of compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure No.4 to this application. Therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would 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.

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 do not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

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.

In view of the above, 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. 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, 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?

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

Put up this case on 12.05.2025, as fresh, showing the name of Mr. Pushpraj Yadav and Subhash Singh, learned counsels, as counsels for opposite party no.2.

Meanwhile, the District Magistrate, Sonbhadra shall also verify and send a report to this Court as to whether the opposite party no.2 has received any compensation or not, and in case it is found to have been received, same has been returned or not.

Learned A.G.A. as well as Registrar (Compliance) of this Court shall look into compliance of this order.

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

4. In compliance of the order dated 11.04.2025, compromise verification report received from Special Judge SC/ST Act, Sonbhadra, has been placed on record. As compensation was not returned by the victim, therefore on 12.05.2025, the following order was passed:-

"Heard Mr. Arvind Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Subhash Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned AGA for the State.

In compliance of order dated 11.04.2025, report regarding verification of compromise deed as well as compensation has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 09.05.2025.

As per the report of District Magistrate, Sonbhadra, the compensation amount of Rs.75,000/- has been given to the opposite party no.2, which has not been returned till date.

Accordingly, the District Magistrate, Sonbhadra is directed to recover the aforesaid amount, if not paid, in accordance with law and place a report in this regard by the next date fixed.

Put up this case on 23.5.2025, as fresh, alongwith the aforesaid report.

Learned A.G.A. for the State shall look into compliance of this order.

Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."

5. In compliance of order odated 12.05.2025, compensation report from District Magistrate Sonbhadra is kept on record as is evident from office report dated 22.05.2025. The letter of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Sonbhadra, dated 09.05.2025 has been placed on record along with order dated 02.05.2025 vide which compromise has been verified between the parties. The letter of District Magistrate, Sonbhadra dated 20.05.2025, mentions about the fact that victim compensation as given to the opposite party no.2 has been returned.

6. 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.

7. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 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.

8. 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,

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Accordingly, proceedings of charge sheet dated 25.06.2023 as well as cognizance/summoning order dated 30.04.2024 and Session Case No.320 of 2024 (State vs. Vijyendra Narayan Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2023, under Sections 384, 504, 506, 120-B I.P.C. and Section 3(2)(va), 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(s) of S.C./S.T (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S.-Karma, District-Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. (P.A.) Act), Sonbhadra, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 23.5.2025

Rahul.