Allahabad High Court
Sabir And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 19 June, 2020
Author: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?A.F.R. Court No. - 36 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11259 of 2020 Applicant :- Sabir And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Hans Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Shri R.C. Upadhyay, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, Waheed Khan son of late Shiv Charan has filed his Vakalatnama which is taken on record.
Complaint Case No.7339 of 2016 alleges commission of offences under Sections 323, 504, 506 and 406 I.P.C. but now it should not proceed further as the parties have compromised.
Looking to the said circumstances of this pandemic, it would not be proper relegate the parties.
The complaint is pending since 2016 the revision was also filed. However, during this pendency it appears that the parties entered into a compromise on 29.6.2019. The revisional court unfortunately rejected their applications which order is also challenged.
The learned counsel for respondent-complainant has also accepted there is a compromise between the parties. The fact that many of the offences are in the realm of non compoundable offence, but the question is what would be end result of the litigation which is pending since 1985. If this Court does not accept the compromise and relegates the parties to undergo the process of going before the trial court, what would be the end result? It would be that the evidences would be led and at the end of the trial for want of evidence, the accused would be acquitted. It would be resulting into what I would call default acquittal when we are faced with both the pendamic and pendency as there is no element of morality or public damage at large. The Dispute being in the realm of petty dispute, the doctrine of judicial restrain cannot be brought into action here in this case.
The recent judgments of the Apex Court and this High Court will permit this Court to quash the proceedings defile the same and direct the court below to defile the proceedings. The reliance placed by the counsel for the petitioners on the decisions of the Apex Court for similar matter under Sections 149, 147, 452 relied by my brother (Justice Om Prakash VII) would be applicable.
The guidelines laid down in 2014 6 SCC 466, Navindra Singh and others versus State of Punjab would apply to the facts of this case. The material on record would go to show that end of the justice would justify exercising the power under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code. I am also supported in my view by 2013 SCC OnLine Ald 5681, Saifula versus State of U.P. Before C.J.M., Agra the entire proceedings of the Complaint Case No.7339 of 2016 shall be defiled and the parties shall not be summoned or asked to remain present.
Order be communicated to the Agra Court by e-mail as expeditiously as possible.
This court is thankful to both the counsels Shri Hans Nath Pandey and Shri Shri R.C. Upadhyay for getting their parties to settle the dispute during this pandemic.
Order Date :- 19.6.2020 A.N. Mishra