Allahabad High Court
Sunil Yadav And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 3 March, 2023
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 65 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7075 of 2023 Applicant :- Sunil Yadav And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prateek Srivastava,Vikrant Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anil Kumar Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 31.10.2021 and summoning order dated 02.08.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 214 of 2019 (State of U.P. Vs. Sunil Yadav and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Khajani, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Gorakhpur.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant no.1 and on account of matrimonial discord, instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the families, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences and have decided to live separately and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement agreement dated 01.10.2022, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 4 to this application.
Learned counsel for the applicants has further submitted that all streedhan of opposite party no.2 has been returned back to her and now, nothing remains to be paid. He has next submitted that in view of the said compromise, the entire proceedings be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 and in para 5 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that opposite party no.2 has received back all her streedhan from the applicants and in para 7, she has stated that she has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of 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). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466.
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.
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 above mentioned case.
Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case Crime No. 214 of 2019 (State of U.P. Vs. Sunil Yadav and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Khajani, District Gorakhpur, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Gorakhpur, are hereby quashed.
This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 3.3.2023 Nadim