Allahabad High Court
Gaurav Goswami And 2 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 January, 2025
Author: Manju Rani Chauhan
Bench: Manju Rani Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:5712 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29328 of 2024 Applicant :- Gaurav Goswami And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prakash Chand Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- Mohd. Arshad,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
1. Heard Mr. Prakash Chand Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Anjani Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Mohd. Arshad, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Ms. Kirti Singh, learned counsel for the State and perused the records.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 19.11.2021 and cognizance order dated 28.05.2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.62771 of 2022 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 149 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (J.D.) F.T.C.-(I), Ghaziabad in pursuance of compromise deed.
3. Earlier on 26.11.2024, the following order was passed:-
"Heard Mr. Prakash Chand Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Mohd. Arshad, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for the State.
The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 19.11.2021 and cognizance order dated 28.05.2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.62771 of 2022 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 149 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (J.D.) F.T.C.-(I), Ghaziabad in pursuance of compromise deed dated 18.07.2024.
As per report of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Ghaziabad dated 22.11.2024, the parties could not appear before the Court concerned for verification of compromise within stipulated time, as directed by this Hon'ble Court.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in compliance of earlier order of this Court the parties could not appear before the Court below for verification of compromise within stipulated period as directed by this Court due to reasons beyond their control as mentioned in the affidavit filed along with application. Therefore, in the interest of justice, some time may be granted to the parties to appear before the Court below in compliance of order dated 24.10.2024 passed by this Court.
Learned A.G.A. has no objection to the aforesaid.
In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed and certified copy of this order. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of two months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statements of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.
Upon due verification of compromise, the Court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.
Put up this case on 09.01.2025, as fresh, along with compromise verification report.
Interim order, granted earlier, shall continue till the next date of listing. "
4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report regarding verification of compromise deed has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 08.01.2025. A letter of the Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/FTC, Court No.1, Ghaziabad dated 04.01.2025 has been placed alongwith certified copy of order dated 18.12.2024 vide which compromise has been verified in the presence of the parties alongwith their respective counsels.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicant in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.
6. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as counsel for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, they have no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.
7. Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-
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,
8. In 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.
9. Considering the facts and circumstances of the 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.
10. Accordingly, the charge sheet dated 19.11.2021 and cognizance order dated 28.05.2022 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No.62771 of 2022 (State Vs. Gaurav and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 149 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (J.D.) F.T.C.-(I), Ghaziabad is hereby quashed.
11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
12. It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud.
13. A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Jitendra/-