Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16644 of 2018 Applicant :- Mohd Adil And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ayub Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Mohd. Ayub, learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State, and Mr. Bhanu Pratap Pal, Advocate, who has appeared for opposite party no.2.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 18.10.2016, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra in Complaint Case No. 13278 of 2014 (State Vs. Adil & Ors), under Sections 323 IPC, P.S. Nai Ki Mandi, District Agra as well as the entire proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.
Learned counsel for the applicants invited the attention of the Court to the averments made in paragraph 15 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application and on the basis thereof, it is submitted that the parties have entered into a compromise on 4.9.2017. Accordingly, he submits that the parties have entered into a compromise outside the court and have amicably settled their dispute. On the aforesaid factual premise, it is urged by the learned counsel for the applicants that the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case be quashed.
Mr. Bhanu Pratap Pal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants. He further submits that he has no objection in case the proceedings of the above mentioned compliant case are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the case 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 complaint case.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 13278 of 2014 (State Vs. Adil & Ors), under Sections 323 IPC, P.S. Nai Ki Mandi, District Agra, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 Arshad