Court No. - 12
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42253 of 2018 Applicant :- Abid Ali And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.
Sri Grijesh Kumar, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama and affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 be taken on record.
Heard Sri Brijesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri Grijesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet No.170/2014 dated 7.7.2014 and 170A/2014 dated 23.8.2014 as well as entire proceedings of Session Trial No.256 of 2016 (State Vs. Safdar Ali and others) arising out of case crime No.680A of 2013, under Section 307 and 504 I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Rampur, pending in the Court of A.S.J. Court No.6, Rampur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that an incident took place on 20.11.2013, in which two cross FIRs have been lodged, one by applicant no.3 Baqar Ali and another by informant-opposite party no.2, Sultan Khan. He submitted that in both the matters, charge sheet have been submitted. He further submitted that during the course of trial, parties are entered into compromise and compromise deed has been filed on 20.9.2018 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Rampur in Session Trial No.256 of 2016. In the application, it is clearly stated that the parties are entered into compromise and no one is injured from the side of informant-opposite party no.2 and further requested that criminal proceeding may be quashed on the basis of compromise. In support of his case, he has placed reliance upon the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh & Ors Vs. State of Punjab and Another reported in 2014 LawSuit (SC) 202, in which, the Apex Court has held that after considering the nature of case even in criminal proceeding after filing of charge sheet under Section 307 IPC may be quashed.
Mr. Girjesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has supported the case of applicant by filing affidavit and submitted that parties have been entered into compromise, therefore, on the basis of compromise the Hon'ble Court may kindly be quash the entire criminal proceeding of the aforesaid case.
I have perused the record and affidavit filed by Sri Grijesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. By perusal of the record, it is clear that there is no serious matter and due to sudden hot talk, incident took place between the applicants and opposite party no.2. Further compromise has taken place between the applicants and opposite party no.2 and matter has been mutually settled, therefore, no useful purpose would be served to keep pending criminal proceeding.
Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the judgement of the Apex Court reported in J.T. 2008(() SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another) as well as Judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab) and reported in 2014 Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present application is, accordingly, allowed. Order Date :- 28.11.2018 Junaid