Reserved on: 13.8.2018
Delivered on: 21.8.2018
Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26054 of 2018 Applicant :- Abdul Qaish And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and the learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1006 of 2012 (Abdul Sattar Vs. Abdul Qaish and Others), under sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Chawni, District Basti as well as the entire proceedings of above mentioned complaint case.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties had entered into a compromise outside the Court and accordingly, an application which was described as deed of compromise (sulahnama) was jointly filed before the Court below, praying therein that the above mentioned complaint case be decided in terms of the compromise so entered between the parties. The same is on the record as Annexure-5 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that subsequent to the filing of the aforesaid deed of compromise dated 26.5.2015, the complainant have abandoned the proceedings of the complaint case pending before the Court below. However, since the present applicants are the accused, they have to appear on every date. Consequently, it is urged that in view of the aforesaid facts, the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case be stayed during the pendency of criminal misc. application.
Admittedly, the case pending before the court below is warrant trial case and therefore, the provisions of Section 249 Cr.P.C. shall apply, which is quoted herein under:
"249. Absence of complainant. When the proceedings have been instituted upon complaint, and on any day fixed for the hearing of the case, the complainant is absent, and the offence may be lawfully compounded or is not a cognizable offence, the Magistrate may, in his discretion, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, at any time before the charge has been framed, discharge the accused."
Consequently, it is provided that the present applicants may approach the Court below and file an application before the Court below itself, in terms of Section 249 Cr.P.C, praying for dismissal of the case on account of the absence of the complainant. In case such an application is filed, the same shall be disposed of by the Court below, within a period of one month from the date of production of certified copy of this order.
With the aforesaid directions, the present application is disposed of finally.
Order Date :- 21.8.2018 Arshad