Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13910 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajendra Sharma Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Heard Sri Bindeshwari Prasad Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri C.P. Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
The present 482 Cr.P.C., application has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding in Criminal Case no. 43329 of 2010 (State Vs. Rajendra Sharma and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 2091 of 2009, under Sections 406, 420 IPC, Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad in pursuance of the compromise dated 27.10.2017, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.
Learned counsel for the applicant states that earlier FIR had been lodged against the applicant owing to certain misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties. With the 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.
It is thus submitted that the parties had been able to resolve their disputes and they understand that there was no criminal intent ever on part of the applicant.
Sri C.P. Tripathi has filed his appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and also personal affidavit of opposite party no.2 Vishesh Kumar Tyagi.
In this regard, a affidavit has been filed today, wherein paragraphs 6 and 7 reads as under:-
"6. That both the parties have settled their dispute and ready to withdraw the present case in terms of compromise filed before the concerned court below as such the pendency of the case registered by the opposite party no.2 would not served any useful purposes therefore liable to be quashed by this Hon'ble Court.
7. That it is expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to allow this application under 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the entire criminal proceeding against applicant in complaint case no. 8889 of 2014 (Rajendra Sharma Vs. Chandra Prakash), pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate VIIth Ghaziabad, under Sections 420, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad in pursuance of the compromise dated 27.10.2017. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to also stay the entire criminal proceeding against the applicant in complaint case no. 8889 of 2014 (Rajendra Sharma Vs. Chandra Prakash) pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate VIIth Ghaziabad under Sections 406, 467, 120B IPC, Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad in pursuance of the compromise dated 27.10.2017 and/or pass such other and further order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case."
The opposite party no.2 has admitted the fact of the compromise having been entered into between the parties and that he has no objection, if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicant in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicant and opposite party no.2 have compromised the dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not want to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2 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 the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to 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, there is minimal chance of witnesses coming forward in support of prosecution case and it may become difficult to prove as to who caused these injuries, hence chances of conviction appear to be remote. 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 Narindra Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra) Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed Order Date :- 24.4.2018 Mini