HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 43678 of 2019
Applicant :- Sunil Kumar And 2 Other
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Vakalatanama alongwith Short Counter affidavit filed by Shri A.K. Singh on behalf of O.P. No.2 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 26.8.2015 of criminal complaint case No. 1155 of 2014, under Sectionsection 498A, Section504, Section506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act P.S. Chauri, District Sant Ravi Das Nagar Bhadohi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi Gyanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that a compromise has already been entered into between the applicants and opposite party no. 2 and a settlement deed has been made which has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the affidavit and pursuant to the said agreement a sum of Rs. 1.00 lac has already paid to O.P .No.2 in settlement of all her claim and the O.P. No..2 does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings, as such, entire criminal proceedings be quashed.
In para 4 of the affidavit filed by learned counsel for O.P. No.2 it has been stated that with the intervention of well wishers of both families, the matter has been settled between the parties and a settlement deed has been made between them. As per the settlement deed a sum of Rs. 1.00 lacs has already been paid to O.P. No.2 in settlement of all her claim and the O.P. No.2 does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and she has no objection, if the proceedings are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008)9 SCC 677]
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.
Wherein 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. And another [2013 (83) ACC 278], 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 case.
Accordingly, the proceedings of complaint case no. 1155 of 2014, under Sectionsection 498A, Section504, Section506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act P.S. Chauri, District Sant Ravi Das Nagar Bhadohi, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Bhadohi Gyanpur are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 5.12.2019