Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19139 of 2018 Applicant :- Kuldeep Sirohi And 10 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Shanker Audichya Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet no. 111 of 2015 dated 3.6.2015 as well as entire proceeding in Criminal Case No. 2860 of 2016 (State Vs. Sajal Chaudhary and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 241 of 2014, under Sections 420, 120B, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(2) 5 of SC and SC Act, Police Station Harduaganj, District Aligarh, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.4, District Aligarh.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the admittedly the opposite party no.2 had sold his agricultural land to the applicants. At the relevant time, certain disputes had arisen between the parties whereupon it had been alleged that full payment has been made by the present applicants. Upon police investigation, a charge sheet was also submitted against the applicants.
With passage of time the parties have been able to resolve their misunderstanding and differences and at present the opposite party no.2 does not wish to press charges against the applicants.
It is thus submitted that the parties had been able to resolve their disputes and they understand that there was no criminal intent ever on part of the applicants.
In this regard, a written compromise as also claimed has been entered into between the parties, a copy of which is annexed in support of the present application.
Sri Kamal Kaushal Upadhyay, learned counsel has filed short counter affidavit of the opposite party no.2. He states that the photograph affixed on the affidavit filed by him is that the opposite party no.2. He does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.
From perusal of the record, it is apparent that parties have entered into compromise and have settled their civil and private disputes amicably.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties regarding the compromise entered into between the parties. Taking all these factors into consideration cumulatively, the compromise between parties be accepted and further taking into account the legal position as laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed, subject to payment of cost Rs. 2,000/- (1,000 on each party) to be deposited before the Legal Services Committee, High Court Allahabad, within a period of three weeks from today.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Mini