Allahabad High Court
Chandra Shekhar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 August, 2024
Author: Saurabh Srivastava
Bench: Saurabh Srivastava
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:129529 Court No. - 83 Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2173 of 2024 Appellant :- Chandra Shekhar Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Appellant :- Rajesh Kumar Nishad Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Rajendra Singh,Sarva Jeet Dubey Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Mr. Rajesh Kumar Nishad, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Digvijay Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Rajendra Singh, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well as learned AGA.
2. The present appeal has been filed to quash the chargesheet dated 30.06.2013 and cognizance/summoning order dated 25.09.2019 passed by Special Judge, SC/ST Act, Banda in Special Case No.189 of 2019 (State Vs. Chandra Shekhar), arising out Case Crime No.63 of 2013, under Section 354A IPC and Section 3(1)10 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Marka, District Banda, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Banda.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for appellants submitted that compromise has already been preferred and the same has also been verified by learned court concerned on dated 03.04.2024 which has been appended with this supplementary affidavit, this fact has also been ascertained and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.2.
4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.
6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.
7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the entire proceedings of Special Case No.189 of 2019 (State Vs. Chandra Shekhar), arising out Case Crime No.63 of 2013, under Section 354A IPC and Section 3(1)10 of SC/ST Act, Police Station Marka, District Banda alongwith chargesheet dated 30.06.2013 and cognizance/summoning order dated 25.09.2019, are hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the present appeal stands allowed.
9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the affidavit filed by the respondent no.2. If at all, respondent no. 2 feels that she has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, she may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within three weeks from today.
Order Date :- 9.8.2024 Vivek Kr.