Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6148 of 2018 Applicant :- Nasre Aalam And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Kaustubh Srivastava,Kandarp Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 1.2.2017 in Criminal Case No.34 of 2017 arising out of case crime no.1327 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 363, 366, 376(2) Jha, Dha, 323, 328, 506 IPC and 5/6 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, P.S. Loni, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.
Heard Sri Kaustubh Srivastava & Sri Kandarp Srivastava, learned counsels for the applicants, Ms. Divya Ojha, Advocate who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3 along with counter affidavit, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It is contended by learned counsels for both the parties that opposite party no.2 had lodged first information report against the applicants under some misapprehension, though in fact the opposite party no.3 daughter of opposite party no.2 had solemnized marriage with applicant no.1. In this behalf a Nikahnama and other relevant documents has been annexed with the affidavit. During investigation also the applicants had filed a writ petition jointly with the prosecutrix in which the arrest of the applicants were stayed. It is further contended that the compromise bearing signatures of both the sides has been filed as Annexure-8 to the affidavit and the same has also been attached with the counter affidavit filed by opposite party no.2 as Annexure--1 to the counter affidavit.
Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that in these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, continuation of the proceeding is nothing except abuse of the court's process.
Learned AGA has also been heard, who has submitted that it is the clear case of mutual compromise that has taken place in between the family and in so many words has urged before the Court that the opposite party has no objection if the present application in question is allowed and the impugned proceedings are quashed.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:
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. 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 expatiated in detail.
In the wake of the compromise arrived at between the parties inter- se if the proceedings of lower court are still allowed to go on, it is apparent that the same shall be a sheer abuse of the court's process. The dockets of the pending cases are already bursting on their seams and the lower Courts must be allowed to engage themselves in more fruitful judicial exercise and not be saddled with matters like the one at hand whose fate is already sealed.
In the aforesaid circumstances of the case, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice and avert the abuse of court's process the impugned proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed forthwith. The same therefore, are hereby quashed.
The application stands allowed.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 23.2.2018 Hasnain