Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16366 of 2019
Applicant :- Lakhan Singh Yadav And 02 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Devesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. Sri Sunil Singh has filed affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.2, is taken on record.
The present appeal has been filed to quash the order dated 12.10.2018 passed by Second Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act) in Special Case No.70 of 2014 (State Vs. Lakhan Singh Yadav & others) arising out of Case Crime No.90 of 2014, under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, P.S. Poochh, District Jhansi as well as entire proceeding of Special Case No.70 of 2014, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act).
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise have entered between them which has been reduced in writing. He has referred the earlier decision passed by another Bench of this Court in Application U/S 482 No.6661 of 2018, dated 28.02.2018, copy whereof has been annexed on page no.19 of the application, in which learned court below was directed to verify the compromise arrived at between the parties and the lower court has verified the compromise and accepted the compromise under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and said in its order that Section 3(1)X SC/ST Act is not compoundable and rejected the compromise, hence present application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the assertion in paragraph no.7 that the parties have entered into a compromise.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 has field the affidavit and in paragraph nos.7, 8 and 9 has accepted the execution of the compromise between the parties and 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, 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 dispute 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 appeal stands allowed and the proceedings of the aforesaid said case is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019 R./