Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6127 of 2018 Applicant :- Lalaram Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- A.K. Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri A.K. Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri S.S. Tripathi, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 1525/IX/2017 (State vs. Lalaram and others) u/s 376, 323, 506 IPC, P.S. Chhata, District Mathura arising out of Case Crime no. 154 of 2017 as well as order dated 9.8.2017.
The contention of the counsel for both the parties is that though present proceeding in which the applicant is facing trial pertains to offence u/s 376, 323, 506 IPC, however during pendency of the investigation itself the prosecutrix -opposite party no. 2 had amicably settled her dispute and had filed her affidavit that she had entered into compromise yet I.O. has submitted chargesheet against the applicant. Learned counsel submitted that even in the present application certified copy of the compromise has been filed, which was filed before the C.J.M., Mathura, therefore, based on it, proceeding be quashed.
I have given anxious consideration to the submission raised by counsel for the applicant. I may record that the Apex court has categorically laid down that in a case of rape even if the victim has subsequently married the accused or they have entered into compromise, proceeding cannot be quashed in the exercise of inherent power u/s 482 Cr.P.C. In view of it, I am not inclined to quash the proceeding as prayed on behalf of the applicant.
In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case keeping in view that the victim has filed an affidavit during investigation and also in the lower court that she had compromised the matter with the applicant, thus, it is directed that if the applicant appears and surrenders within one month from today before the court below and applies for bail, his prayer for bail shall be considered and decided in view of the settled law laid by this Court in the case of Amrawati and another Vs. State of U.P. reported in 2004 (57) ALR 290 as well as judgement passed by Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) Lal Kamlendra Pratap Singh Vs. State of U.P.
With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 Dhirendra/