High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:168797 Court No. - 73 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 31413 of 2024 Applicant :- Km.Anshu Sharma And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up Through Its Principal Secretary Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Javed Raza Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Sri Javed Raza, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Triloki Singh, learned AGA for the State, and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been challenging the proceedings of Case No. 1014 of 2023 (State v. Km. Anshu Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 641 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 352, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Masuri, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate/ Fast Track Court, Ghaziabad, on the basis of compromise dated 30.05.2023.
Decision
3. Earlier, an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. being Application U/s 482 No. 27893 of 2023 was filed, which was disposed of by order dated 09.08.2023, which reads as under: "Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 05.04.2023 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case no.1014 of 2023, arsing out of Case Crime No.641 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 352, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Massuri, District Ghaziabad in pursuance of compromise. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of compromise deed dated 30.05.2023 has been annexed as Annexure-3 to this affidavit. 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 process of law. Learned A.G.A., however, submits that it is the concerned court below, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicants may approach the concerned court below and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law. In view of above, without expressing any opinion on the merit of the case, both the parties are directed to appear before the Court below along with compromise deed as well certified copy of this order within two weeks from today. It is expected that Court below may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of the 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 the date of production of a certified copy of this order, if there is no other legal impediment. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the Court concerned 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? The Court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings. For a period of two months, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of. " 4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise has been verified by order dated 05.10.2023. A certified copy of the said order has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit filed in support of bail application. 5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court. 6. Learned A.G.A. for the State accepts that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed alongwith verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. 7. Before proceeding 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; and 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 hereinabove, 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 proceedings of Case No. 1014 of 2023 (State v. Km. Anshu Sharma and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 641 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 352, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Masuri, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ Judicial Magistrate/ Fast Track Court, Ghaziabad, on the basis of compromise dated 30.05.2023, are hereby quashed. 11. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. A copy of this order be sent to the court concerned forthwith. Order Date :- 22.10.2024 DS