Allahabad High Court
Abid And 7 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 23 January, 2023
Author: Samit Gopal
Bench: Samit Gopal
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1640 of 2023 Applicant :- Abid And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Fateh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bhanu Pratap Pal Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.
List revised.
Heard Sri Mohammad Fateh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Bhanu Pratap Pal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Ms. Arti Agarwal, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.
Sri Bhanu Pratap Pal, Advocate states that he has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in the office but the same is not on record.
Office to trace out the said vakalatnama and place the same on record and also make a note in the order sheet regarding the same.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed by the applicants Abid, Shanu @ Shahnawaz, Raja @ Rehan, Nanha @ Tariq, Chhotu, Malu @ Vasid, Sayeed Ahmad and Arshad with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No.1328 of 2018, arising out of case crime no.191 of 2018 (Shanu @ Shahnawaj and others Vs. State of U.P.) u/s 147, 148, 149, 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Aonla, District Bareilly pending before Judicial Magistrate Ist, Aonla, District Bareilly and further to stay the entire proceedings of aforesaid case.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and opp. party No.2 have compromised the dispute on 06.09.2021. It is argued that as the dispute between the parties was compromised, the applicants earlier filed Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.38384 of 2018 (Abid and others Vs. State of U.P and another) in which vide order dated 29.11.2022, coordinate Bench of this Court directed the parties to appear before the court below for filing a proper compromise affidavit, copy of the same is annexed as annexure no.9 to the affidavit filed in support of present application. In pursuance of the said order, the applicants appeared before the trial court and filed the compromise deed dated 06.09.2021. It is argued that the Judicial Magistrate Ist, Aonla, District Bareilly vide order dated 12.12.2022 verified the said compromise, copy of the same is annexed as annexure no.10 to the affidavit filed in support of present application, as such the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 admitted the fact of compromise and stated that he has no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the applicant.
From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably, the said compromise has been also been verified by the trial court.
The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. 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) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.
From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant(s).
The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.
The present application is allowed.
(Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 23.1.2023 Gaurav