Ram Singh v. Badde
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:146495 Court No. - 75 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23801 of 2024 Applicant :- Badde @ Krishna Kant And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Mr. O.P. Vishwakarma, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. D.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the records. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint No.40 of 2024 (Ram Singh vs. Badde @ Krishna Kant Sharma and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and Section 3(1) W(i) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Shahbad, District-Rampur, pending before the court concerned on the basis of compromise. 3. Earlier on 25.07.2024, the following order was passed:- "1. Heard Mr. Vinod Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. 2. The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint No.40 of 2024 (Ram Singh vs. Badde @ Krishna Kant Sharma and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354 I.P.C., and Sections 3(i)W(i) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Shahbad, District-Rampur, on the basis of compromise. 3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them. The compromise deed dated 29.05.2024 has been moved before the Court concerned mentioning therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, certified copy of the said compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure-6 to this application. Therefore, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the proceedings before the court below and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of the 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. 4. Learned AGA also do not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants. 5. 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. 6. 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 two weeks 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. 7. 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. 8. Put up this case on 23.08.2024, as fresh, at 02:00 p.m. 9. Till then, no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. " 4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report regarding verification of compromise has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 22.08.2024. A letter of the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Rampur dated 17.08.2024 has been placed alongwith copy of order dated 17.08.2024 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. Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that it is a complaint case, therefore, no compensation has been received to opposite party no.2. 6. Learned A.G.A. for the State 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 entire proceedings of Complaint No.40 of 2024 (Ram Singh vs. Badde @ Krishna Kant Sharma and others), under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and Section 3(1) W(i) of SC/ST Act, Police Station-Shahbad, District-Rampur, 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 :- 6.9.2024 Jitendra/-