Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15263 of 2018
Applicant :- Mohd. Sirajuddin @ Munna Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Raghuraj Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Singh
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Pramod Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the bailable warrant dated 24.8.2015 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2395 of 2011 (State Vs. Sirajuddin), arising out of Case Crime No. 15 of 2010, under Sections- 457, 380, 448 and 427 I.P.C., Police Station- Fafund, District- Auraiya, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Auraiya.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the dispute between the parties with respect to tenancy in favour of the applicant. With passage of time the parties have been able to resolve their misunderstanding and differences and at present the opposite party no.2 does not wish to press charges against the applicant.
In this regard, an affidavit has been filed today, wherein paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 reads as under:-
"4. That the applicant was demanded extra rent from the deponent hence some verbal duels were between both the parties, but now the deponent is residing at the house of the applicant amicably without any grievance and there is no dispute rest between both the parties, hence both the parties were entered into compromise and executed a compromise deed dated 20.4.2018 which is already annexed with the annexure no.6 with the application filed under section 482 Cr.P.c. which has been initiated as criminal case no. 2395 of 2011 arising out of case crime no. 15 of 2010 under section 457, 380, 448 and 427 of I.P.C., Police Station Fafund, District Auraiya.
5. That since present criminal proceeding was launched by the deponent against applicant due to local party bandi, but now the deponent does not want to continue present criminal proceeding against the applicant, because he is residing at his house amicably without any complaint against him.
6. That in view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to accept the present affidavit and same may be kept on record and present criminal misc. application under section 482 Cr.P.C. may be allowed on the terms of compromise deed dated 20.4.2018 (annexure No. 6) to the affidavit filed in support of Application U/s 48 Cr.P.C., so that justice be done."
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicant or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. In fact the present counter affidavit discloses that the compromise has been entered into between the parties. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicant 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 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicant 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 applicant. Opposite party no.3 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicant 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 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed, subject to payment of cost Rs. 2,000/- (1,000 on each party) to be deposited before the Legal Services Committee, High Court Allahabad, within a period of three weeks from today.
Order Date :- 28.5.2018 Mini