Allahabad High Court
Yogesh Kumar And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. . And Another on 20 December, 2023
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:241080 Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42135 of 2023 Applicant :- Yogesh Kumar And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. . And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandrajeet Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
1. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed short counter affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.
2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Jagdish Prasad Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant no.1 and other applicants are his family members and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the family and the society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences and the parties have decided to live separately and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement agreement dated 26.06.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 3 to this application.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in terms of the settlement agreement, the applicant no.1 had paid a sum of Rs.2,40,000/- to the opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues and the entire streedhan had also been returned back to her and now, nothing remains to be paid.
6. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement drawn between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, the entire proceedings be quashed.
7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed a short counter affidavit on her behalf and in para 3 of the said affidavit, the settlement agreement has been acknowledged. Further in para 4, it has been stated that entire streedhan has been received by opposite party no.2. Further in para 7, it has been stated that opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.
8. Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.
9. This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Hon?ble 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.
(vi). State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688.
10. Wherein Hon'ble 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.
11. 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 present case.
12. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 2424 of 2021 (State Vs. Yogesh and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 330 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Dhaulana, District Hapur, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hapur as well as charge-sheet dated 02.09.2020 and cognizance/ summoning order dated 09.04.2021, are hereby quashed.
13. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 20.12.2023/Nadim