Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17216 of 2018 Applicant :- Phool Singh And 3 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Rakesh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Rakesh Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State, and Mr. Prem Kumar Bhartiya, Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2 by filing his vakalatnama in court today, which is taken on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the summoning order dated 12th February, 2014 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-IInd, Etah in Complaint Case No. 426 of 2015 (Sheelendra Kumar vs. Phool Singh & Others) under Sections 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Awagarh, District Etah as well as the entire proceedings of above mentioned complaint case.
The present criminal application came up for admission on 13th July, 2018 and following order was passed:
"In view of the averments contained in paragraph 12 of the affidavit filed in support of the present application, as well as the averments made in the affidavit filed today in court, it is desirable that both the parties may appear before the court on 27.7.2018.
Put up as fresh on 27.7.2018. It is made clear that both the parties shall appear personally before the court on the next date fixed. "
In compliance to the order dated 13th July, 2018, the applicant no.4 Babita as well as the opposite party no.2 Sheelendra Kumar are present in Court today.
On a pointed query being raised by the Court, both the applicant no.4 and the opposite party no.2 have stated that they have reconciled their differences and now they are living happily as husband and wife.
In light of the aforesaid statement of the applicant no.4 and the opposite party no.2, learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the parties have resolved their differences amicably, no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of above mentioned complaint case. He further submits that instead of relegating the parties to the court below, this Court in exercise of its power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case.
Sri Prem Kumar Bhartiya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the factum regarding the compromise so entered into between the parties. He submits that in view of the compromise so entered into between the parties, whereby they have amicably resolved their differences, coupled with the fact that the applicant no.4 and the opposite party no.2 are living as husband and wife, no cause of action survives with the opposite party no.2 to pursue the above mentioned complaint case filed by her.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
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.
In the aforesaid judgments, 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 as the parties have resolved their differences by way compromise so entered into between the parties.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 426 of 2015 (Sheelendra Kumar vs. Phool Singh & Others) under Sections 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Awagarh, District Etah, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-IInd, Etah, are, hereby, quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Rajeev Misra, J.) Order Date :- 27.7.2018 Sushil/-