Court No. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6227 of 2021
Applicant :- Anuj Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yogendra Pal Singh
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. and perused the material available on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 1488 of 2015 (State Vs. Sanjay and Another) arising out of Case Crime No. 675 of 2014 Under Sections 498-A, 376, 511, 506 IPC, and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-Hasanpur, District- Amroha, in terms of the compromise.
It is submitted that it is a matrimonial dispute and on account of intervention of their well-wishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The learned counsel for the applicants has drawn my attention to annexure no. S.A.-1, a compromise arises between the contesting parties by which both the parties have sorted out their differences and dispute, duly verified by the Court below. This fact of compromise has been confirmed and nodded in affirmative by the counsel for the opposite party no.2 and it has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error, it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in the light of the compromise.
Pursuant to order of this Court dated 5.8.2021 the compromise entered between the parties has been verified and same has been filed through supplementary affidavit.
The attention of This Court has been drawn to the following judgements of the Apex Court:-
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.
In the aforesaid cases, 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 complaint case.
In view of the above, the proceedings of the aforesaid Case are hereby, quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the Court below immediately.
Order Date :- 7.10.2021 S.Verma