Court No. - 69
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21471 of 2019 Applicant :- Deepak Kumar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahendra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Compromise affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2, is taken on record.
Heard Sri Mahendra Tripathi, learned counsel on behalf of applicants, Shri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2., Sri Abhinav Prasad, learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet No. 77/2014 dated 11.07.2014 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 2523/2014 (State Vs. Deepak Kumar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 12/2014, under sections 498A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra on the basis of compromise dated 21.05.2019.
The argument is that the parties have entered into compromise, as per averment made in para 7 and 8 of the compromise affidavit, filed by Shri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2. A copy of compromise deed has also been annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the compromise affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party no. 2.
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.
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.
Accordingly, the proceedings of the aforesaid Case are hereby, quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.5.2019 Arti