Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10271 of 2018
Applicant :- Manish Kumar @ Ram Shukh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Sharma,Atul Sharma
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Sri Nand Lal Singh, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 09.01.2018 and the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 175 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No. 1001 of 2016, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Harraiya, District- Basti, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Basti.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that while the FIR had been lodged and charge sheet submitted arising from certain commercial disputes and misunderstanding arising therefrom between the parties, with passage of time, the parties have been able to resolve their disputes and differences. The present applicant has thus paid to the informant/opposite party no.2 a sum of Rs. 1,30,000/- to his full satisfaction of the money claimed.
In view of repayment of the money claimed, the opposite party no.2 does not wish to pursue the matter any further and the parties have entered into a written compromise. A copy of said compromise has been annexed with this application. It was also filed before the court below with a prayer to drop the prosecution case. The said application has been rejected by the court below vide order dated 15.03.2018.
Perusal of the aforesaid order reveals that while the court below has not doubted the correctness of the facts stated in the compromise deed or genuineness of such document. In fact the same was filed by the opposite party no.2 himself. The said application has been rejected for reason of offence alleged being non-compoundable.
It is thus clear with the contents of the compromise and its genuineness stand duly verified between the parties.
Sri Nand Lal Singh, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission advanced by learned counsel for the applicant. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings of 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 Narindra Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not want 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 Narindra Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra) and Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed. Order Date :- 29.3.2018 Lbm/-