Allahabad High Court
Hariom Alias Chotu Parihar And Another vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 27 May, 2025
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90240
Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9937 of 2025
Applicant :- Hariom Alias Chotu Parihar And Another
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Maurya,Pankaj Sahni
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pawan Mishra,Pramod Kumar Saroj
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pawan Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for the State.
2. The present application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 20.12.2023 as well as summoning order dated 16.08.2024 and entire proceeding of Special Trial No.1151 of 2024 (State vs. Hariom @ Chotu Parihar and Another), arising out of Case Crime No.223 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a of S.C./S.T, Act, P.S.-Raksa, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Jhansi, on the basis of compromise.
3. On 10.04.2025, the following order was passed:-
"Compliance affidavit filed by learned A.G.A. in Court today is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.
Mr. Pramod Kumar Saroj, Advocate, has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in the registry today. Office is directed to trace out the same and place it on record.
Heard Mr. Ashish Kumar Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pramod Kumar Saroj, learned counsel 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 20.12.2023 as well as summoning order dated 16.08.2024 and entire proceeding of Special Trial No.1151 of 2024 (State vs. Hariom @ Chotu Parihar and Another), arising out of Case Crime No.223 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a of S.C./S.T, Act, P.S.-Raksa, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Jhansi, 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, certified copy of compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure No.5 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 opposite party no.2 also 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 09.05.2025, as fresh, showing the name of Mr. Pramod Kumar Saroj, learned Advocate, as counsel for opposite party no.2.
Meanwhile, the District Magistrate, Jhansi 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 aforesaid compromise verification report received from Special Judge SC/ST Act, Jhansi, is kept on record as is evident from office report dated 08.05.2025. As compensation amount was not returned by the victim, therefore on 09.05.2025, the following order was passed:-
"In compliance of order dated 10.04.2025, a report regarding verification of compromise deed as well as compensation report has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 08.05.2025.
The report from District Social Welfare Officer, Jhansi shows that the compensation amount of Rs.1.5 lacs has been paid to the opposite party no.2, which has not been returned till date.
The District Magistrate, Jhansi is directed to take appropriate steps to recover the compensation amount of Rs.1.5 lacs from opposite party no.2 and send a report in this regard to this Court by the next date fixed.
Put up this case on 27.05.2025, as fresh, for further hearing.
Learned A.G.A. as well as Registrar (Compliance) of this Court shall look into compliance of this order.
Interim order, if any, is extended till the next date of listing."
5. In compliance of order dated 09.05.2025, report from District Magistrate, Jhansi is kept on record as is evident from office report dated 26.05.2025. The letter of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Jhansi, dated 02.05.2025 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, Jhansi dated 23.05.2025, mentions about the return of Rs.1,50,000/-.
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 20.12.2023 as well as summoning order dated 16.08.2024 and Special Trial No.1151 of 2024 (State vs. Hariom @ Chotu Parihar and Another), arising out of Case Crime No.223 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a of S.C./S.T, Act, P.S.-Raksa, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T. Act), Jhansi, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.
12. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 27.5.2025
Rahul.
