High Court
Case Details
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:189700 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32102 of 2024 Applicant :- Gufran And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abdul Mazeed,Syed Mahfooz Husain Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- Iqubal Hussain, Khalid Mahmood,G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.
Legal Reasoning
1. Heard Mr. Abdul Mazeed, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Iqubal Hussain, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. 2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quash the charge-sheet No.268/2018 dated 02.09.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.5930 of 2018 (State Vs. Gufran and others), arising out of Case Crime No.381 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur on the basis of compromise. 3. Earlier on 23.10.2024, the following order was passed:- "1. Memo of appearance filed by Sri Iqbal Husain and Sri Khalid Mahmood, learned Advocates on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is taken on record. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Shashi Kant Rai, learned AGA for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, and perused the record. 3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed by the applicants to quash charge sheet no. 268/18 dated 02.09.2018 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 5930 of 2018 (State v. Gufran and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 381 of 2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, on the basis of compromise between the parties dated 15.07.2024. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and to that effect compromise deed has been filed. Copy of said compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure no. 5 to the affidavit, therefore, continuance of proceedings against the applicants would be 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 and learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 do 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, parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed and 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, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks 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. 8. Upon due verification of compromise, the Court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court. 9. Put up this case on 25.11.2024, as fresh, showing the name of learned counsel for the 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, a report regarding verification of compromise deed has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 23.11.2024. A letter of the C.J.M., Rampur dated 22.11.2024 has been placed alongwith certified copy of order dated 20.11.2024 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 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, charge-sheet No.268/2018 dated 02.09.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No.5930 of 2018 (State Vs. Gufran and others), arising out of Case Crime No.381 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur, pending before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, 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 :- 2.12.2024/S.A.