High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:136300 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21121 of 2024 Applicant :- Santosh Singh Yadav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ranjeet Asthana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rahul Singh Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Mr. Ranjeet Asthana, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Rahul Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and Mr. Varun Vijay Singh, learned counsel State, are present. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 124 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 626 of 2009 (State Vs. Santosh Yadav and others) pending in the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur under section 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act registered in P.S. Mohmdabad, District Ghazipur. 3. On 05.07.2024 the following order was passed:- "1. Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocate has filed vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in the Court today, which is taken on record. 2. Heard Mr. Ranjeet Asthana, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Rahul Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Special Session Trial No.124 of 2011, arising out of Case Crime No.626 of 2009 (State vs. Santosh Yadav and Others), pending in the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1) (x) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Mohmdabad, District- Ghazipur, on the basis of compromise deed. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered into between the parties. The copy of the said compromise/mutual deed, filed before the court below, is annexed as Annexure No.3 to this application. Therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would be a futile exercise and wastage of time of the Court and will be abuse of process of law. Hence, proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303. 5. Learned AGA as well as learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants. 6. Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it. 7. In view of the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed as well as a certified copy of this order within a two week from today. 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, after hearing the informant, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of one month from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not? The facts regarding the amount towards compensation as received and stated to be returned, shall also be verified. 8. Upon due verification of compromise as well as compensation amount, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court. 9. Put up this case on 06.08.2024, as fresh, at 02:00 p.m showing the name of Mr. Rahul Singh as learned counsel for opposite party no.2. 10. Till then, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case." 4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the report regarding verification of compromise received from Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 21.08.2024. A letter of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur dated 25.07.2024 has been placed on record along with copy of order dated 23.07.2024 vide which the compromise has been verified in the presence of parties and their respective counsels. It has also been mentioned that no compensation has been received by opposite party no. 2. 5. Learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order dated 23.07.2024, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 6. 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, 7. 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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail. 8. 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. 9. Accordingly, the proceeding of Special Session Trial No. 124 of 2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 626 of 2009 (State Vs. Santosh Yadav and others) pending in the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Ghazipur under section 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act registered in P.S. Mohmdabad, District Ghazipur, are hereby quashed. 10. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 22.8.2024 Nisha