Court No. - 75
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39629 of 2019 Applicant :- Manoj Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar Srivastava,Noor Muhammad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepak Kumar Tripathi
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit, filed by counsel for the applicants today in Court, is taken on record.
Counter affidavit, filed by counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 today in Court, is also taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Deepak Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No. 2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 5256 of 2012 (Smt. Uma Vs. Manoj and another), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Narkhi, District Firozabad.
At the very outset, Sri Deepak Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has stated that the parties have entered into an amicable settlement of all disputes and differences and a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- was agreed to be paid to the Opposite Party No.2 Smt. Uma as a permanent alimony in respect of all her claims. Pursuant to the said agreement, a sum of Rs.21,50,000/- has already been paid to her and today in the Court, a Demand Draft bearing no. 000992 dated 15.11.2019 drawn in favour of the Opposite Party No.2 for a sum of Rs.3,50,000/-, has been handed over to counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 and the entire amount has now been paid to the Opposite Party No.2.
Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has further stated that no dispute or differences remains between the parties and he has no objection, if the present proceedings are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicants has also submitted that in view of the settlement made between the parties, the entire agreed amount of Rs.25,00,000/- has already been paid to the Opposite Party No.2 and the parties have agreed to live separately and therefore, as per the amicable settlement made between the parties, present proceedings be quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675.
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008)9 SCC 677].
3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.
4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.
5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.
Wherein the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 5256 of 2012 (Smt. Uma Vs. Manoj and another), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Narkhi, District Firozabad are hereby quashed.
The application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 26.11.2019 Nadim