Allahabad High Court
Anshul Pathak And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 December, 2020
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 51 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 14607 of 2020 Applicant :- Anshul Pathak And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sudhanshu Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and Mr. Sudhanshu Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as perused the entire material available on record.
This application15th under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the Charge-sheet dated 9th January, 2020 as well as cognizance order dated 12.02.2020 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate- Ist, Kanpur Nagar, on the basis of compromised so arrived at between the parties.
On the matter being taken up, on 29th September, 2020 the Court passed following order: Case Crime No. 107 of 2020, under Sections 498-A, 323, I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Kakrauli, District- Muzaffarnagar, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 1/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Muzaffarnagar "Sri Sudhanshu Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no. 2 and states that he has filed a short counter affidavit along with his Vakalatnama in the Registry today.
Heard Sri Sanjay Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur Nagarfiled to quash the charge sheet dated 09.01.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 12.02.2020 and the entire proceedings in Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State Vs. Anil Pathak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of M.M. I, Kanpur Nagar.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the charge sheet had been submitted, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing and the compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure - 4 to this application.
Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the submissions so advanced by learned counsel for the applicants.
Accordingly, it is provided that the parties sha Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur Nagarll appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of two months from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.
Put up this case after two months i.e. 1st December, 2020 as fresh showing the name of Sri Sudhanshu Singh, Advocate as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.
Till then no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants. "
In compliance of the order dated 29.09.2020, a report has been submitted by Civil Judge (J.D.), FTC (CAW), Kanpur Nagar, dated 23rd October, 2020 wherein it has been mentioned that the compromise so arrived at between the parties has been verified.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the compromise so arrived at between the parties and the same has also been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case be may be quashed by this Court.
On the instruction received, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 submits that since the parties have entered into a compromise, opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.
This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:
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, Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur NagarIn the aforesaid judgments, the 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. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278. in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.
Considering the facts and circumstances of the Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur Nagar case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.
Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No. 6515 of 2020 (State vs. Anil Phatak and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 75 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. as also under Sections 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate-Ist, Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 1.12.2020 v.k.updh.