Court No. - 68
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8284 of 2020 Applicant :- Kedarnath Poddar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwini Kumar Awasthi,Atharva Dixit,Manish Tiwary(Senior Adv.),Pranshu Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Tripathi,Nand Kishor Mishra
Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Pachori,J.
Heard, Sri Pranshu Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri Anand Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record.
The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has been filed for quashing the impugned cognizance order dated 07.02.2020 as well as impugned charge bearing charge sheet no. 02 of 2020 dated 07.01.2020 in Case No. 531 of 2020 (State Vs. Prateik Poddar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 33 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Jyotiba Phule Nagar (Amroha), pending in the court of Civil Judge, (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Jyotiba Phule Nagar (Amroha).
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise on 23.11.2020 and the said compromise was verified on 15.09.2021, certified copy of the said compromise deed has been filed as SA-1 of the affidavit. On being arrived at mutual consent, both the parties have come to terms and decided to part their ways and therefore, no useful purpose would be served to keep the matter alive and pending the present case be finally decided.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has filed counter affidavit and argued that as the applicants have already arrived at amicable settlement on 23.11.2020, therefore, opposite party no. 2 is no more interested to pursue the case any more against the applicants.
Present matter is related to matrimonial dispute, both the parties entered into a amicable settlement, and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and has jointly submitted that in the interest of justice the proceedings may be quashed in the light of the compromise.
A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed that: (SCC p.340, para 58) "58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.."
Where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. [Vide: Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692].
Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed.
The entire proceedings relating to impugned cognizance order dated 07.02.2020 as well as impugned charge bearing charge sheet no. 02 of 2020 dated 07.01.2020 in Case No. 531 of 2020 (State Vs. Prateik Poddar and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 33 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 of Indian Penal Code and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, registered at Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Jyotiba Phule Nagar (Amroha), pending in the court of Civil Judge, (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate, Jyotiba Phule Nagar (Amroha), is hereby quashed.
This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the affidavit filed by the opposite party no. 2. If at all, opposite party no. 2 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.
Order Date :- 26.10.2021 Ishan