Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16985 of 2019
Applicant :- Panna And 5 Others
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kamlesh Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Ajit Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Narendra Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State. Sri Rajesh Tiwari has filed affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.2, is taken on record.
The present appeal has been filed to quash the entire proceeding including charge sheet as well as framing charge dated 31.08.2015 in S.T.No.95 of 2014 (State Vs. Ram Bhajan and others) in Case Crime No.153 of 2013 under Sections 147, 323, 325, 435, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3(1)(10), 3(2)(3) SC/ST Act, P.S. Baburi, District Chandauli on the basis of compromise dated 08.03.2019 pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge, Chandauli.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise have entered between them which has been reduced in writing and the parties have filed the compromise before the lower court on 08.03.2019 but the learned lower court without considering the compromise deed in a mechanical manner rejected the application dated 08.03.2019. Now the learned counsel for the parties have entered into a compromise and it is mentioned in the application, filed U/S 482 from paragraph no.11 onwards and they wanted to live peacefully.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 has field the affidavit and in paragraph nos.3 and 4 has accepted the execution of the compromise between the parties and does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the proceedings in 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 Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653, Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicants 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 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 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 appeal stands allowed and the proceedings of the aforesaid said case is hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 29.4.2019 R./