Court No. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13636 of 2020 Applicant :- Adesh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pramod Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri Rajeev Kumar Rai, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 497 of 2019 (State vs. Shakuntla Devi and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. P.S. Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division)/Fast Track Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, the present F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. During the pendency of the aforesaid case, the parties with the intervention of respected members of both family have amicably settled their disputes and differences and a settlement deed dated 24.9.2019 was made between parties which has been annexed as Annexure No. 5 to the application.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has already been paid to O.P. No.2 which has been acknowledged by counsel for O.P. No.2 and he further states that the balance amount of Rs. 1.3 lacs shall be paid to O. P. No.2 by 9.8.2021 and in view of the settlement between the parties the entire criminal proceeding be quashed.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 filed an affidavit stating therein that the compromise has already been entered between them and a sum of Rs. 50,000/- has already paid to her and Stridhan has also been returned to her and she has no objection if the entire criminal proceedings are quashed at this stage.
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 Case No. 497 of 2019 (State vs. Shakuntla Devi and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 54 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. P.S. Mahila Thana, District- Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Division)/Fast Track Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 R