Court No. - 71
Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 7265 of 2018 Appellant :- Awadhesh Kumar Tiwari And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Appellant :- Amit Kumar Singh Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Gaurav Gupta
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Heard learned counsel for appellant, learned counsel for O.P. No.2 and learned AGA for the State.
This Criminal Appeal is being preferred by the appellants against cognizance order dated 3.8.2018 passed by Addl. Session Judge-II/Special Judge SC/ST Act Basti in S.S.T. No. 54 of 2018, State Vs. Awadhesh Tiwawri and others, arising out of case crime no. 156 of 2018 under section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) (r) SC/ST Act P.S. Ktwali, District Basti.
Learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the appellant and O.P. No.2 has entered into compromise, copy of which has been filed as Annexure No. 5 to the application in which he has stated that with the intervention of the respected persons of the society they have entered into a comprise and they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceeding in order to maintain good harmonious relations between them.
Learned counsel for O.P. No.2 has also filed an affidavit in which in para 4, it has been stated that in order to maintain good harmonious relations between them both parties have entered into a compromise and they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceeding. Even from perusal of the record, it is evident that when the said compromise deed was sent for verification before the court below two injured namely Ajay Kumar and Chandan have also filed their affidavit stating there in that in order to maintain cordial relations between them they have entered into compromise with the appellant and they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceeding against the appellant.
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 complaint case.
Accordingly, cognizance order dated 3.8.2018 passed by Addl. Session Judge/Special Judge SC/ST Act Basti in S.S.T. NO. 54 of 2018, State Vs. Awadhesh Tiwari and others, arising out of case crime no. 156 of 2018 under section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1) (r) SC/ST Act P.S. Kotwali, District Basti is hereby quashed.
The Criminal Appeal is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 25.7.2019 R