Allahabad High Court
Jaagdish Singh vs State Of U.P.And Another on 23 August, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:170052 Court No. - 92 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34240 of 2009 Applicant :- Jaagdish Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Nath Singh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Raj Karan Yadav Hon'ble Anish Kumar Gupta,J.
1. Heard Sri Shiv Nath Singh Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Raj Karan Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.
2. The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 529 of 2009 (State Vs. Jagdish Singh), arising out of case crime no. 156 of 2009, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., P.S. Rura, district Kanpur Dehat, pending before the Vth Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Kanpur Dehat.
3. On 18-01-2010 this Court has passed the following order:-
"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Raj Karan Yadav, learned counsel, who has put in appearance on behalf of opposite party no.2.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of the Criminal Case No. 529 of 2009, arising out of Case Crime No. 156 of 2009, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station Rura, District Kanpur Dehat, pending before learned Vth Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Kanpur Dehat.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant and opposite party no.2 are real brother and due to mis-conception present criminal prosecution has been initiated by the opposite party no.2 who have entered into cormpromise on 01.12.2009, copy of which, is annexed as Annexure-4 to the petition.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 states that the opposite party no.2 had entered into compromise with the applicant and prays for and is granted 10 days time for filing counter affidavit. As prayed by learned counsel for the applicant one week, thereafter is granted for rejoinder affidavit.
List thereafter before appropriate Court.
Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case."
4. The learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 on instructions, has categorically admitted the compromise between the parties, in the aforesaid order dated 18-01-2010.
5. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and the opposite party no.2 are real brothers and there were some dispute with regard to electrical connection of the tubewell and they have amicably settled their dispute and the compromise deed was duly executed on 01-12-2009 between the parties, which was admitted by the learned counsel for the opposite party on 18-01-2010. However, during the pendency of the instant application, it is stated that the opposite party no.2 has expired in the year 2015 and prior to that he has given categorical statement to his counsel admitting the compromise between the parties.
6. In view thereof, the instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of the compromise dated 01-12-2009, which was duly admitted by the opposite party no.2 prior to his death. Therefore, having regard to the law laid down by the Apex Court in State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan & Others (2019) 5 SCC 688, State of M.P. Vs. Dhruv Gurjar & Anr. (2019) 5 SCC 570 and Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab & Anr. (2012) 10 SCC 303, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 529 of 2009 (State Vs. Jagdish Singh), arising out of case crime no. 156 of 2009, under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., P.S. Rura, district Kanpur Dehat, pending before the Vth Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Kanpur Dehat are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 23.8.2023 pks