Court No. - 76
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44078 of 2019 Applicant :- Vimlesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Tapan Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Yogesh Tiwari
Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Applicant namely, Vimlesh, opposite party no.2, namely, Sujeet Kumar and victim Seema, duly identified by their counsel, are present in person. Their signatures have also been verified by their counsel.
Heard Sri Tapan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Yogesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Sri P.K. Shahi, learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 27.02.2019 and summoning order dated 20.05.2019 along with entire criminal proceeding of Case No. 1055/2019 (State Vs Vimlesh) under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station Sarpatahan, District Jaunpur.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the dispute between the parties were purely civil and private in nature, an FIR came to be lodged by the opposite party no.2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties and not on account of real incident. There was never any criminal intent on part of the applicant nor any criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred. At present the parties to the dispute, who are related to each other, have resolved their differences and have made peace. In view of the settlement reached between the parties, the parties pray another chance be given to them to develop and experience normal relationship. The continuance of the criminal trial may in fact hamper the otherwise good chance of the parties enjoying a normal relationship. In such changed circumstances, the opposite party no.2, namely, Sujeet Kumar does not wish to press charges against the applicant.
An affidavit has also been filed in this regard wherein the aforesaid facts stated by the applicant has been confirmed. The averments made in para no.3 and 4 of the affidavit are reproduced hereinunder :-
"3. That the said opposite party no.2 is informant in the said case and now the matter has been settled between the parties and the Opposite Party no.2 also doesn't want to prosecute the said applicant further and is accepting the said compromise dated 25.09.2019 as held between the parties at Jaunpur.
4. That the said dispute between the parties held with the respectable persons of the society because the said persons are neighbours to each other and they want to live peacefully."
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case, are quashed. He does not dispute the correctness of the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants on the correctness of the documents relied upon by him.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgments of the Apex Court :-
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.
In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Cort 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 the case of Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. & 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 and also the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceeding of the above mentioned complaint case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No.1055/2019 (State Vs Vimlesh) under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., Police Station Sarpatahan, District Jaunpur, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 17.12.2019 Md Faisal