Allahabad High Court
Gaurav And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. on 31 August, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:140865 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 5940 of 2023 Appellant :- Gaurav And 2 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. Counsel for Appellant :- Sunil Kumar Yadav,Yashpal Yadav Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The present appeal has been filed for challenging the order dated 20.05.2023 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No. 1, Muzaffarnagar in S.T. No. 1151 of 2017 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out Case Crime No. 135 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 376, 377, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Muzaffarnagar, pending in the court of Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No. 1, Muzaffarnagar.
3. At the very outset, it has been jointly submitted by learned counsel for the rival parties that both the parties have entered into a compromise, which has been reduced in writing on 04.07.2024 appended along with supplementary affidavit.
4. Sri Pramod Kumar, learned counsel for the informant is having no objection if the instant appeal is adjudicated on the basis of compromise.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.
6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.
7. In view of aforementioned facts and circumstances, once the compromise has already been entered into by both the parties, there is hardly any purpose available for adjudicating the instant appeal on the basis of merits of the judgment and order dated 20.05.2023 and keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the entire proceedings of S.T. No. 1151 of 2017 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out Case Crime No. 135 of 2015, under Sections 498-A, 323, 354, 376, 377, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Muzaffarnagar, pending in the court of Additional Session Judge/Special Judge, POCSO Act, Court No. 1, Muzaffarnagar and order dated 20.05.2023, are hereby set-aside on the basis of compromise.
8. Accordingly, the present appeal stands allowed.
9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the affidavit filed by the informant. If at all, informant feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.
Order Date :- 31.8.2024 #Vik/-