Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16385 of 2020 Applicant :- Sunil Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Narendra Deo Shukla,Pratibha Shukla,Vivek Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Amit Kumar Tiwari
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for applicants is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned AGA for the State and Sri Amit Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 715 of 2020 (State vs. Sunil Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 425 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. P.S. Sarayinayat, District- Allahabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Court No. 17, Allahabad.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, the present F.I.R. was lodged against the applicants. During the pendency of the aforesaid case, the parties with the intervention of respected members of both family have amicably settled their dispute and differences and a settlement deed dated 1.4.2021 was made between parties which has been annexed as Annexure No. I to the supplementary affidavit.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that a sum of Rs. 6.00 lacs has already been paid by the applicants to O.P. No.2, the copy of demand draft has already been annexed as Annexure No. 7 to the application and in view of the settlement between the parties the entire criminal proceeding be quashed.
Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has also submitted that the matter has already been compromised between the parties and a sum of Rs. 6.00 lacs has already been received by O.P. No.2. and he has no objection if the entire criminal proceedings are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:
1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675
2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of
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 case.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 715 of 2020 (State vs. Sunil Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 425 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act. P.S. Sarayinayat, District- Allahabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M, Court No. 17, Allahabad are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 30.7.2021 R