Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11434 of 2020
Applicant :- Ilman Chaudhary
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Dur Vijay Singh,Dur Vijay Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kuldeep Singh Tomar
Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.
Learned counsel for applicant filed supplementary affidavit, same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
This Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the impugned charge sheet No. 171 of 2019, cognizance order dated 02.11.2019 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 8354 of 2019 (State v. Ilman Chaudhary and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 196 of 2019, under Sections 307, 504, 506, 323 of I.P.C., Police Station Civil Lines, District Aligarh, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh on the basis of compromise dated 23.03.2021.
Submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that parties have amicably settled their dispute. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh submitted its report wherein it is mentioned that both the parties have appeared before the court below on 13.07.2021 in pursuance of this Court's order dated 05.07.2021 and the court below has verified their compromise on 11.08.2021 as directed by this Court, hence, the compromise has been verified by the court below. No useful purpose would be served in keeping the present proceedings pending, hence it is prayed that proceedings in this case be quashed.
Learned A.G.A. has also stated that he has no objection to the petition being allowed on the basis of compromise.
In B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675, Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offence. Reference given by this Court in Shaifullah and others v. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278] in which law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid case has been explained in detail.
Recently, Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal No. 884 of 2021 arising out of S.L.P. (Cri) No. 4617 of 2021 Salimbhai Hamidbhai Memon v. Niteshkumar Maganbhai Patel & Anr has held in para no. 31 (6) that exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and deceit cannot appropriately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences.
In view of facts and circumstances of the case and law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid authorities, the proceedings of the case deserves to be quashed.
The charge sheet No. 171 of 2019, cognizance order dated 02.11.2019 as well as entire proceeding in above mentioned case stands quashed.
In the result, the instant application is allowed.
Order Date :- 6.10.2021 v.k.updh.