Court No. - 49
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19199 of 2018 Applicant :- Vakeel And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Anurag Vajpeyi,Gaurav Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.
Counter affidavit filed today, is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 10.10.2016 as well as the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 405 of 2016, under Sections- 147, 452, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Dadri, District- Gautam Budh Nagar in light of the compromise entered into between the parties.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties, certain FIR came to be lodged both by the applicants against the opposite party no. 2 and also by the opposite party no. 2 against the present applicants. However, during the course of the investigation, the parties had entered into compromise and submitted an affidavit to that effect whereunder it is agreed between the parties that there was no criminal intent on part of the applicants and that no criminal offence has been committed by the applicants.
In this regard, it is further stated that the parties have entered into a written compromise, a copy of which has been annexed with the affidavit in support of the present application.
Sri Praveen Kumar Singh, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. In fact the present counter affidavit discloses that the compromise has been entered into between the parties. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgments of Apex Court in the case of Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand reported in (2014) 9 SCC 653 and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants 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 Narinder Singh vs. State of Punjab (supra), Yogendra Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (supra) and Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (supra) the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application stands allowed, subject to payment of cost Rs. 2,000/- (1,000 on each party) to be deposited before the Legal Services Committee, High Court Allahabad, within a period of three weeks from today.
Order Date :- 29.5.2018 A. Singh