Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6092 of 2018 Applicant :- Ghanshyam Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Uday Bhan Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vivek Giri
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 2.11.2016, cognizance order dated 23.12.2016 and the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No.148 of 2016 (State Vs. Ghanshyam) under Sections 354, 294, 504 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2016, P.S. Bithoor District Kanpur-Nagar, pending in the court of Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.XIV, Kanpur-Nagar.
Heard Sri Uday Bhan Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Vivek Giri appearing for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is contended by learned counsel for both the parties that the cross cases were lodged from both the sides and the applicant is facing trial and the first information report lodged by opposite party no.2 in Crime no.24 of 2016, under Sections 354, 294, 504 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act. It is further submitted by both the parties that in both the cases parties have arrived at a compromise and have settled all their disputes. In this behalf it is stated that the prosecutrix and the opposite party no.2 have jointly filed an affidavit that with the intervention of elders of both the parties they do not want to proceed any further with the matter. Therefore, the proceedings of the present case and all the cross cases in which the brothers of opposite party no.2 have been nominated be quashed. It is further contended that the dispute between the parties is purely private nature and no useful purpose would be served by keeping both the cases pending.
Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that in these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, continuation of the proceeding is nothing except abuse of the court's process.
Learned AGA has also been heard, who has submitted that it is the clear case of mutual compromise that has taken place in between the family and in so many words has urged before the Court that the opposite party has no objection if the present application in question is allowed and the impugned proceedings are quashed.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:
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. 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 expatiated in detail.
In the wake of the compromise arrived at between the parties inter- se if the proceedings of lower court are still allowed to go on, it is apparent that the same shall be a sheer abuse of the court's process. The dockets of the pending cases are already bursting on their seams and the lower Courts must be allowed to engage themselves in more fruitful judicial exercise and not be saddled with matters like the one at hand whose fate is already sealed.
In the aforesaid circumstances of the case, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice and avert the abuse of court's process the impugned proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed forthwith. The same therefore, are hereby quashed.
The application stands allowed.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Hasnain