Court No. - 71
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29399 of 2019 Applicant :- Vikki Dubey @ Nitin Dubey And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nihar Ranjan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Shri Atul Kumar Tiwari, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama and counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no.2 today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 CrPC has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the Charge Sheet dated 02.04.2014 as well as entire criminal proceedings of case no. 1501 of 2015 in Case Crime No. 132 of 2014 under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) (X), SC/ST Act, pending in the court of Special Court SC/ST Act, Jhansi.
On the matter being taken up, Shri Atul Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, has submitted that the dispute has already been compromised outside the Court and he does not want to further pursue the case against the applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants has also submitted that a compromise has already been entered into between the applicants and opposite party no.2 and a settlement deed has been executed, which is annexed as annexure 3 of the affidavit, in which, it has been stated that they have entered into compromise and no dispute remains and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants, as such criminal proceedings be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has also filed an affidavit and in para 5 of the affidavit, it is stated that the applicants and opposite party no.2 are neighbours and they have entered into a compromise and they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings.
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 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 case.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No. 1501 of 2015 in Case Crime No. 132 of 2014, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, pending in the Special Court of SC/ST Act, Jhansi as well as charge sheet dated 2.4.2014, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 30.7.2019 Neetu