High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:168090 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25236 of 2024 Applicant :- Kanchan Verma Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rishabh Kesarwani,Shrish Chandra,Suraj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvendra Dwivedi,Siddhant Sahai With
Legal Reasoning
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9534 of 2024 Applicant :- Pravin Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rishabh Kesarwani,Shrish Chandra,Suraj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvendra Dwivedi,Siddhant Sahai Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Supplementary affidavits filed by learned counsel for the applicants in both these application today in the Court, are taken on record. Office is directed to register the same. 2. Heard Mr. Shrish Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Siddhant Sahai, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 03.03.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 26.05.2023 in Case No.741 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.338 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Sarai Inayat, District-Prayagraj, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.9, Prayagraj on the basis of compromise. 4. Earlier on 30.08.2024 in application U/S 482 No. - 25236 of 2024, the following order was passed:- "Sri Siddhant Sahai and Sri Sarvendra Dwivedi, Advocates have filed short counter affidavit along with their Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2/informant, in Court today, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State. It has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant that in respect of co-accused Pravin Kumar Singh, who is husband of informant, this Court has already passed order dated 22.08.2024 in Application u/s 482 No. 9534 of 2024, wherein parties were directed to file compromise application before the trial court concerned. It was further submitted that the instant application may be connected with Application u/s 482 No. 9534 of 2024. In view of the aforesaid, connect this application along with Application u/s 482 No. 9534 of 2024 and list accordingly, showing the names of counsel for opposite party no. 2/informant. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant Kanchan Verma in Case No. 741 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.338 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S.- Sarai Inayat, District- Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.9, Prayagraj. " 5. Earlier on 22.08.2024 in application U/S 482 No. - 9534 of 2024, the following order was passed:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant in Court today, is taken on record. 2. Sri Sarvendra Dwivedi, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama along with short counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2/informant, which are taken on record. 3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Sarvendra Dwivedi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2/informant and learned AGA for the State. 4. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, including charge sheet dated 03.03.2023 as well as summoning order dated 26.05.2023, of Case No. 741 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.338 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, P.S.- Sarai Inayat, District- Prayagraj, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.9, Prayagraj, in terms of the compromise. 5. It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that on account of intervention of the well-wishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties and the said compromise will be filed before the court concerned within two weeks from today. It is further contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. 6. Whether a compromise has taken place or not can 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 aforesaid, it is directed that in case the parties file an appropriate application for compromise before the trial court concerned within a period of two weeks from today, the same shall be verified by the court concerned in accordance with law and if the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court by the next date. 8. List this case on 20.09.2024, showing the name of Sri Sarvendra Dwivedi, as counsel for the opposite party no.2/informant. 9. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action would be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case." 6. In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise between the parties has been verified vide order dated 15.10.2024, certified copy of which has been place at page 12 of the supplementary affidavits each. 7. 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. 8. 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. 9. 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, 10. 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. 11. 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. Accordingly, 12. charge sheet dated 03.03.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 26.05.2023 in Case No.741 of 2023, arising out of Case Crime No.338 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Sarai Inayat, District-Prayagraj, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Room No.9, Prayagraj is hereby quashed. 13. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 14. It is always open to the parties to approach before this Court in case verification has been done by playing fraud. 15. A copy of this order be sent to the lower court forthwith. Order Date :- 21.10.2024 Jitendra/-