Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14820 of 2018
Applicant :- Raju Alias Javed Khan And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Prakash Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Advocate has filed a short counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the charge sheet no. 290 of 2008 dated 08.11.2008 in Criminal Case No. 428 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 371 of 2008, under Sections 380, 411 I.P.C., Police Station- Sasani Gate, District- Aligarh and cognizance has been taken by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-2, Aligarh in pursuance of compromise dated 11.04.2018.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants and the opposite party no.2 are blood relatives and that owing to certain differences and misunderstanding, the FIR had came to be lodged alleging theft of certain items, though no such theft had ever taken place and that the applicants had never any criminal intent.
During the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have reconciled their disputes and differences and are now agreed that no offence as alleged had ever occurred. The compromise entered into between the parties has already been reduced in writing and annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit filed in support of present application. The said compromise appears to have been filed before the learned court below. Copy annexed with the present application is a certified copy of the compromise as filed before the learned court below.
Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel appearing on behalf opposite party no.2 has filed the personal affidavit of opposite party no.2, wherein he has verified the facts as the parties have settled their dispute through compromise entered into between the parties. He does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants. He further submits that opposite party no. 2 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 settled the dispute through a compromise and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw from 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 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 Narindra Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra) and Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed. Order Date :- 30.4.2018 Lbm/-