HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 40894 of 2019
Applicant :- Rakib And 4 Others
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Laxmi Kant Bhatt
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Sri Shiv Prakash Tiwari, learned Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge-sheet dated 22.08.2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 9 of 2019 as well as cognizance order dated 09.09.2019 and proceedings of case no. 300 of 2019 (State Vs. Rakib and others), under Sections 498A, Section323, Section328, Section376, Section377 IPC, Police Station Mahila Thana, District – Meerut pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate/Additional Small Causes Judge, Meerut.
It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the applicant no.1 is husband, applicant no.2 is father-in-law, applicant no.3 is mother-in-law, applicant no.4 is sister-in-law and applicant no.5 is brother-in-law of opposite party no. 2. It is further submitted that earlier marriage of opposite party no.2 was solemnized with Rashid (brother of applicant no.1), but after the death of Rashid, marriage of opposite party no.2 again solemnized with applicant no.1. After sometime on account of acrimonious relations, opposite party no.2 lodged FIR dated 20.01.2019 registered as case crime no. 0009 of 2019 at Police Station Mahila Thana, District Meerut against the applicants making several allegations of her harassment and torture by the accused persons in her matrimonial home, in which Investigating Officer after investigation submitted charge-sheet on 22.08.2019. Thereafter, parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court and pursuant to said settlement, opposite party no.2 moved an affidavit dated 21.10.2019. The said affidavit has been brought on record as Annexure No.6 to the application.
It is submitted that no compromise application has yet been filed before the concerned court below, where criminal proceeding is pending against the applicants and requested to allow the applicants to move compromise application before the concerned court below.
Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Court below, as such said compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.
On the request made by learned counsel for the applicants three weeks time is allowed to the applicants to file compromise application before the concerned court below.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that in case such compromise application is filed by the applicant before it within aforesaid period, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.
Order Date :- 15.11.2019
AK Pandey
