Court No. - 44
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28595 of 2018 Applicant :- Rajnish Babu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
Heard Mr. Gaurav Sisodia, learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the opposite party No. 1 and Mr. Atul Kumar Singh, Advocate, who has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 by filing an affidavit on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 along with his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.
This application under section 482 Cr. P. C. has been filed challenging the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.1709 of 1994 (Smt. Kusum Gupta vs. Rajnish Gupta and others), under sections 406 and 498A IPC, Police Station Dataganj, District Budaun, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Badaun.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that during the pendency of the above mentioned complaint case, the applicant No. 1, who is the husband of the opposite party No. 2 and the applicant Nos. 2 and 3, who are the sons of the applicant No. 1 and the opposite party No. 2 have agreed to resolve the dispute outside the Court by way of compromise. Subsequently, the compromise so entered between the parties was reduced to writing by way of compromise deed dated 17.12.1990, photo copy of which is on the record at page 27 of the paper book On the basis of the said compromise deed, an application dated 29.01.2018 was jointly filed by the applicant No. 1 and the opposite party No. 2 to decide the above mentioned complaint case on the basis of the compromise so entered between the parties. This application dated 29.01.2018 which is at page 31 of the paper book is said to be pending. Now the applicants have rushed to this Court for the relief as mentioned herein above.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicant No. 1 and the opposite party No. 2 are husband and wife and they have amicably settled their dispute outside the Court and pursuant to the said settlement, they are now living together as husband and wife.
In this view of the matter, learned counsel for the applicants submits that no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case. He further submits that this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr. P. C. may itself quash the proceedings instead of relegating the parties to the Court below.
Mr. Atul Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party No. 2 does not dispute the facts stated by the learned counsel for the applicants. He has invited the attention of the Court to the affidavit sworn by the opposite party No. 2 and filed today in Court. On the basis thereof he submits that the factum of compromise is factually admitted to the opposite party No. 2. Pursuant to the same, the applicant No. 1 and the opposite party No. 2 are living together as husband and wife. As such, it is urged that the opposite party No. 2 now does not have any surviving cause of action to pursue the complaint 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.
wherein 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.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case No.1709 of 1994 (Smt. Kusum Gupta vs. Rajnish Gupta and others), under sections 406 and 498A IPC, Police Station Dataganj, District Budaun, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 5.9.2018 HSM