Allahabad High Court
Pawan Kumar Rai And 4 Ors vs State Of U.P. And Another on 22 September, 2020
Author: Ram Krishna Gautam
Bench: Ram Krishna Gautam
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18554 of 2016 Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Rai And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Vikram Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Kumar Rai,Raghvendra Prakash Hon'ble Ram Krishna Gautam,J.
The applicants Pawan Kumar Rai and four others, by means of this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court with prayer to set aside the summoning order dated 17.5.2016 passed by C.J.M., Azamgarh, as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1062 of 2016, Madhu Rai Vs. Pawan Rai and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S. Jeeyanpur, district Azamgarh, pending in court of C.J.M., Azamgarh.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the records.
Learned counsel for the applicants argued that both sides have entered into a compromise in this matrimonial dispute, wherein a compromise in Case No. 974 of 2015, Madhu Rai Vs. Pawan Rai, has been filed before the Family Judge, Azamgarh. It was duly verified by the court concerned in presence of both parties and thereupon Case No. 974 of 2015 as well case for divorce in between were got decided in the light of above compromise duly entered in between. There is recital of above mentioned Complaint Case in the compromise. Hence in this matrimonial dispute the parties have also entered into a compromise and in view of law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar & another Vs. Union of India and others, [2019(1) JIC 7 (SC)]; B.S. Joshi and others Versus State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675, Madan Mohan Abbot Versus State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582; and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014(6) SCC page 466 the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1062 of 2016 including summoning order dated 17.5.2016 may be set aside.
Learned counsel AGA has no objection in view of the above mentioned law laid down by Apex Court.
A perusal of compromise entered into in between Madhu Rai and Pawan Rai filed by way of supplementary affidavit at page no. 9 in Case No. 974 of 2015 in the Court of Family Judge, Azamgarh, reveals that the parties have entered into a compromise and this compromise has been acted upon by the above Court. There is recital with regard to the present complaint case. Hence in view of law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh Versus State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303; Social Action Forum for Manav Adhikar & another Vs. Union of India and others, [2019(1) JIC 7 (SC)]; B.S. Joshi and others Versus State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675, Madan Mohan Abbot Versus State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582; and Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2014(6) SCC page 466 there remains no reason for keeping above proceeding pending.
Accordingly, this application is allowed and entire proceeding of above mentioned Complaint Case No. 1062 of 2016, Madhu Rai Vs. Pawan Rai and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D. P. Act, P.S. Jeeyanpur, district Azamgarh, pending in court of C.J.M., Azamgarh, including summoning order dated 17.5.2016 are hereby ended.
Order Date :- 22.9.2020 Pcl