Court No. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6292 of 2018 Applicant :- Suresh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Giri Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 20.11.2016, cognizance order dated 23.1.2017 and the entire proceedings of Case No.2871 of 2017 (State Vs. Suresh and others) under Section 308 IPC, arising out of Case Crime No.21 of 2016, P.S. Bithoor District Kanpur-Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.VI, Kanpur-Nagar.
Heard Sri Vivek Giri, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Udai Bhan Mishra, appearing for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
It has been contended by learned counsel for both the parties that there are cross cases and the applicants are facing trial in Crime No.21 of 2016 whereby from both the sides first information report was lodged as Crime no.21 of 2016, under Section 308 IPC. In both the cases charge sheet has been submitted. It is further contended that the applicants and opposite party no.2 are resident of the same village and have settled all their disputes and differences and with the intervention of the elder people of the village and they have entered into a compromise. Therefore, the proceedings of the present case be also quashed and in this behalf a joint affidavit of opposite party no.2 and the injured has been filed today, which is taken on record in which they have stated that they do not want to proceed further. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petition pending. Learned counsel for the applicant who was appearing in the cross case has stated that this Court has already quashed the proceedings of S.S.T. No.148 of 2016 (State Vs. Ghanshyam) under Sections 354, 294, 504 IPC and 7/8 POCSO Act, arising out of Case Crime No.24 of 2016, P.S. Bithoor District Kanpur-Nagar, in Criminal Misc. Application 482 No.6092 of 2018. The dispute is purely private in nature, therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case may also be quashed.
Further submission of learned counsel for the applicant is that in these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, continuation of the proceeding is nothing except abuse of the court's process.
Learned AGA has also been heard, who has submitted that it is the clear case of mutual compromise that has taken place in between the family and in so many words has urged before the Court that the opposite party has no objection if the present application in question is allowed and the impugned proceedings are quashed.
Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:
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. 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 expatiated in detail.
In the wake of the compromise arrived at between the parties inter-se if the proceedings of lower court are still allowed to go on, it is apparent that the same shall be a sheer abuse of the court's process. The dockets of the pending cases are already bursting on their seams and the lower Courts must be allowed to engage themselves in more fruitful judicial exercise and not be saddled with matters like the one at hand whose fate is already sealed.
In the aforesaid circumstances of the case, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice and avert the abuse of court's process the impugned proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed forthwith. The same therefore, are hereby quashed.
The application stands allowed.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 26.2.2018 Hasnain