Allahabad High Court
Pavendra Kumar And 5 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 17 May, 2023
Author: Rajiv Gupta
Bench: Rajiv Gupta
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:107826 Court No. - 65 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11996 of 2023 Applicant :- Pavendra Kumar And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jalaj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Tripathi Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Saurabh Tripathi, 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 07.01.2022 and cognizance order dated 14.09.2022 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 5082 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Pevendra and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 673 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354(Kha) IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly.
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, the present 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 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 16.01.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 7 to this application.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that as per the settlement agreement, the applicant no.1 had paid a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- to opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues including streedhan.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, the entire proceedings be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit and in para 3 of the said affidavit, opposite party no.2 has categorically stated that she has received a sum of Rs.8,00,000/- in lieu of all her claims and dues including streedhan. In para 7, she has further stated that she does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and 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 No. 5082 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Pevendra and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 673 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506, 354(Kha) IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Izzat Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bareilly, are hereby quashed.
This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.
Order Date :- 17.5.2023 Nadim