Allahabad High Court
Rahul And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 September, 2023
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:180872 Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33571 of 2023 Applicant :- Rahul And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Kumar Kartikeya,Arvind Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
1. Shri Sujeet Kumar, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama and short counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court, which is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Sujeet Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the records.
3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash charge-sheet dated 31.10.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 1503 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kakadeo, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate-IInd, Court No. 52, Kanpur Nagar.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant no.1, applicant nos. 2 is her mother-in-law and applicant no.3 is her brother-in-law.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, present criminal case has been instituted against the applicants by opposite party no.2, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the families, applicants and the opposite party no.2 have amicably and genuinely settled all their disputes and differences and now they do not have any grievance against each other.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of this Court to a compromise deed dated 24.02.2023, drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-3 to his application.
7. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that pursuant to the said compromise, the applicants have agreed to pay a sum of Rs.12,00,000/- to opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues and return back her streedhan. It is further stated that the said amount of Rs.12,00,000/- hasalready been paid to opposite party no.2 and streedhan has also been returned back.
8. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, entire proceedings against the applicants be quashed.
9. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed a short counter affidavit and in paragraph 5 the affidavit, the said compromise has been acknowledged. In paragraph 9 of the said affidavit, the factum of receiving of Rs.12,00,000/- through demand draft has also been acknowledged. It is further stated in paragraph 11 of the said affidavit that in view of the compromise made between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, opposite party no.2 does not want to further pursue the proceedings against the applicants and has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.
10. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
11. This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:-
(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675.
(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677].
(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.
(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.
(v). 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, law expounded by Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
12. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.
13. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 1503 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No. 29 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kakadeo, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Metropolitan Magistrate-IInd, Court No. 52, Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed.
14. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 19.9.2023 Subham