Smt.Kamlesh Sharma and another v. State of U.P. and another)

4. It is submitted that during the pendency of the criminal proceedings, both parties were arrived at a compromise and settled their dispute amicably out of the Court. The present applicants have moved an application being Application under Section 482 No.23108 of 2023 (Smt.Kamlesh Sharma and another Vs. State of U.P. and another) with the prayer to quash the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise.

5. Having considered the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court, vide order dated 5.7.2023, passed in the aforesaid criminal matter, has relegated the parties before the court below to get their compromise verified and granted liberty to approach before this court again to get the criminal proceedings quashed on the basis of compromise verification. For ready reference, the order dated 5.7.2023 is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Special Trial No. 351 of 2023 (State Vs. Kamlesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 681 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, police station Atmadaula, district Agra, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Agra. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that in this case opposite party No. 2 lodged a first information report on 07.10.2022 against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, in which charge sheet was submitted on 06.12.2022, on which the Magistrate concerned took cognizance. After submission of charge-sheet the parties concerned entered into a compromise outside the Court and compromise deed was also prepared on 12.5.2023, which has been filed as Annexure 4 to the affidavit. It is submitted that no compromise application has yet been filed before the concerned court below, where criminal proceeding is pending against the applicants and requested to allow the applicants to move compromise application before the concerned court below. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Court below, as such said compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. On the request made by learned counsel for the applicants three weeks' time is allowed to the applicants to file compromise application before the concerned court below. Accordingly, the concerned Court below is directed that in case such compromise application is filed by the applicant before it within aforesaid period, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the Court and the compromise will be made part of the record. 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. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. With the aforesaid directions the application stands disposed of."

6. In pursuance of the order dated 5.7.2023 passed by this Court, both parties appeared before the court below and their compromise has been verified vide order dated 7.8.2024. Before verification of the compromise, the learned court has passed the order dated 3.7.2024 with an observation that the District Social Welfare Officer, vide its letter dated 24.6.2024, has informed that both victims have returned the compensation amount as received under the SC/ST Act. For ready reference, the order dated 3.7.2024 passed by court below is quoted hereinbelow:- " ददिनननांक

03.07.2024 पतनवलली पपेश हहई , पपुकनर करनयली गयली। पपुकनर पर बचनव पक्ष कपे दवदनन अधधिवकन उपससस्थित आयपे। उनकपे दनरन यह कहन गयन दक मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कपे आदिपेश कन अनपुपनलन दकयन जन चपुकन हहै। समपुदचत आदिपेश पनररत करनपे ककी यनचनन ककी गयली हहै। पनांतनवलली कपे अवललोकन सपे यह दवददित हलोतन हहै दक पनस्थिरनन पत अन्तगरत धिनरन -482 सख्यन-23108/2023 शलीमतली कमलपेश शमनर व अन्य बननम उत्तर पदिपेश रनज्य व अन्य मम मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि दनरन पनररत आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 05.07.2023 कपे अनपुपनलन मम वनदिली मपुकदिमन तस्थिन अदभियपुकगण ककी ओर सपे एक सपुलहननमन न्यनयनलय कपे समक्ष पसतपुत दकयन गयन , धजसपे न्यनयनलय दनरन ददिनननांक 07.02.2024 कलो सत्यनदपत दकयन गयन हहै। उक आदिपेश मम सली .डली.ओ./समनज कल्यनण अधधिकनरली आगरन सपे सरकनर दनरन पनप्त धिनरनदश जलो वनदिली पक्ष कलो भिपुगतनन ककी गयली स्थिली , जमन करनकर ररपलोरर पपेदषित करनपे कपे धलयपे कहन गयन स्थिन। उक आदिपेश कपे अनपुपनलन मम समनज कल्यनण अधधिकनरली दनरन पतननांक-485/स०क०/ अत्य० उत्पली/2024-25 ददिनननांदकत 24.06.2024 दनरन इस आशय ककी आख्यन पपेदषित ककी गयली हहै दक पलीदड़ित शली सतलीश चन्द्र दनरन डनक सनांख्यन 306775 ददिनननांक 23.04.2024 मपु० 1,50,000/-रु० तस्थिन उनककी पपुतली कपु मनरली कनजल दनरन बबक डड नफ्र सनांख्यन-000382 ददिनननांक 19.04.2024 मपु० 1,50,000/-रु० न्यनयनलय कपे आदिपेश कपे अनपुपनलन मम अपनपे पनस्थिरनन पत ददिनननांक 09.05.2024 कपे सनस्थि उनकपे न्यनयनलय मम उपससस्थित हलोकर जमन करनयन गयन हहै, जलो उनकपे दनरन चनलनन कपे मनध्यम सपे रनजककीय कलोषि मम जमन दकयन जन चपुकन हहै। मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि दनरन पनररत आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 05.07.2023 कपे अनपुपनलन मम दिलोननों पक्षनों दनरन दिनधखिल सपुलहननमन सत्यनदपत करनपे ककी आख्यन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कलो भिपेजली जननली हहै। अततः कनयनरलय धलदपक कलो दनदिरदशत दकयन जनतन हहै दक दिलोननों पक्षनों कपे सपुलहननमन सत्यनदपत आदिपेश ककी पदत सपुलहननमन व उसकन सत्यनपन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कलो भिपेजनन सपुदनसशत करपे। पतनवलली वनसतपे अदग्रिम आदिपेश ददिनननांक 29.08.2024 कलो पपेश हलो। ह० अपठनलीय

03.07.2024 अपर सत न्यनयनधिलीश/दवशपेषि न्यनयनधिलीश (एस०सली०/एस०रली०एक्र), आगरन।" 7. Subsequently, the learned additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.8 Agra, has passed a compromise verification order dated 7.8.2024 with an observation that both parties were appeared before the court below and they were also identified by their respective counsels. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been spelled out to the parties who have admitted the factum of the compromise and, accordingly, compromise has been verified. For ready reference, the order dated 7.8.2024 is quoted hereinbelow:- , न्यनयनलय सनांख्यन " न्यनयनलय अपर मपुख्य न्यनदयक मधजसरड पेर -08, आगरन। मपु०अ०सनां० 702/2022 रनज्य बननम सतलीश रनजन धिनरन-354,504,506 भिन०दिनां०सनां० स्थिननन-एत्मनदिदिदौलन, आगरन। ददिनननांक-07.08.2024 आदिपेश आज पतनवलली पपेश हहई। वनदिली कमलपेश शमनर एवनां अदभियपुक सतलीश रनजन उपससस्थित आयपे। वनदिली एवनां अदभियपुक पक्ष ककी ओर सपे ददिनननांक 21.08.2023 कलो पसतपुत रनजलीननमन (समझदौतन) पनस्थिरनन पत मय शपस्थिपत पर सपुनन गयन। वनदिली दनरन अपनपे पनस्थिरनन पत ददिनननांदकत 21.08.2023 मम कस्थिन दकयन गयन दक वनदिली एवनां अदभियपुक कपे मध्य समझदौतन हलो गयन हहै धजसकपे धलए वनदिली दनरन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय मम पनस्थिरनन पत अनांतगरत धिनरन 482 दि०प०सनां० सनांख्यन 25530/2023, आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 04.10.2023 पसतपुत दकयन गयन। वनदिली कमलपेश शमनर कपे रनजलीननमन पनस्थिरनन पत पर चसपन फलोरलो एवनां हसतनक्षर कलो उस कपे अधधिवकन शली जय शमनर दनरन एवनां अदभियपुक कपे चसपन फलोरलो एवनां हसतनक्षर कलो उनकपे अधधिवकन शली दिपेवदित्त शमनर दनरन पमनदणत कर ददिनननांक 08.01.2024 कलो तसदिलीक दकयन गयन हहै। उभियपक्षनों कलो रनजलीननमन मम अदभिधलधखित शतरनां कलो पढ़कर सपुननयन एवनां समझनयन गयन। उभियपक्षनों दनरन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय , इलनहनबनदि पनस्थिरनन पत अनांतगरत धिनरन 482 दि०प०सनां० सनांख्यन 25530/2023, आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 04.10.2023 मम वदणरत सभिली शतरनां पर पपूणर सहमदत व्यक ककी गयली। तद्नपुसनर सनांधधिपत तरदिलीक दकयन गयन। पतनवलली दनयत ददिनननांक 23.08.2024 कलो पपेश हलो। ह० अपठनलीय 7/8/24 अपर मपुख्य न्यनदयक मधजसरड पेर, न्यनयनलय सनां0-8, आगरन।" 8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that, in the above eventuality of the compromise took place between the parties and the aforementioned compromise verification order, the instant application may be allowed and the criminal proceeding initiated against the present applicants may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have buried the hatchet and there is no grudges between them against each other. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court :- (i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675. (ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667. (iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1. (iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. (v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

9. In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge- sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below:- "15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court; (ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non- compoundable. (iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power; (iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; (v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated; (vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences; (vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned; (viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute; (ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and (x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

10. Certified copies of order dated 3.7.2024 and order dated 7.8.2024 are filed as Annexure no.6 and Annexure no.7 respectively.

11. Learned AGA has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the court concerned.

12. Having considered the aforementioned compromise verification report as well as the compromise verification order and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.

13. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been duly verified by the concerned court below, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

14. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action. Order Date :- 2.1.2025/vkg

4. It is submitted that during the pendency of the criminal proceedings, both parties were arrived at a compromise and settled their dispute amicably out of the Court. The present applicants have moved an application being Application under Section 482 No.23108 of 2023 (Smt.Kamlesh Sharma and another Vs. State of U.P. and another) with the prayer to quash the criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise.

5. Having considered the amicable settlement arrived at between the parties, this Court, vide order dated 5.7.2023, passed in the aforesaid criminal matter, has relegated the parties before the court below to get their compromise verified and granted liberty to approach before this court again to get the criminal proceedings quashed on the basis of compromise verification. For ready reference, the order dated 5.7.2023 is quoted hereinbelow:- "Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Special Trial No. 351 of 2023 (State Vs. Kamlesh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 681 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, police station Atmadaula, district Agra, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Agra. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that in this case opposite party No. 2 lodged a first information report on 07.10.2022 against the applicants under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354 IPC and 3(2)Va SC/ST Act, in which charge sheet was submitted on 06.12.2022, on which the Magistrate concerned took cognizance. After submission of charge-sheet the parties concerned entered into a compromise outside the Court and compromise deed was also prepared on 12.5.2023, which has been filed as Annexure 4 to the affidavit. It is submitted that no compromise application has yet been filed before the concerned court below, where criminal proceeding is pending against the applicants and requested to allow the applicants to move compromise application before the concerned court below. Whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the Court below, as such said compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court. On the request made by learned counsel for the applicants three weeks' time is allowed to the applicants to file compromise application before the concerned court below. Accordingly, the concerned Court below is directed that in case such compromise application is filed by the applicant before it within aforesaid period, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the Court and the compromise will be made part of the record. 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. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. With the aforesaid directions the application stands disposed of."

6. In pursuance of the order dated 5.7.2023 passed by this Court, both parties appeared before the court below and their compromise has been verified vide order dated 7.8.2024. Before verification of the compromise, the learned court has passed the order dated 3.7.2024 with an observation that the District Social Welfare Officer, vide its letter dated 24.6.2024, has informed that both victims have returned the compensation amount as received under the SC/ST Act. For ready reference, the order dated 3.7.2024 passed by court below is quoted hereinbelow:- " ददिनननांक

03.07.2024 पतनवलली पपेश हहई , पपुकनर करनयली गयली। पपुकनर पर बचनव पक्ष कपे दवदनन अधधिवकन उपससस्थित आयपे। उनकपे दनरन यह कहन गयन दक मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कपे आदिपेश कन अनपुपनलन दकयन जन चपुकन हहै। समपुदचत आदिपेश पनररत करनपे ककी यनचनन ककी गयली हहै। पनांतनवलली कपे अवललोकन सपे यह दवददित हलोतन हहै दक पनस्थिरनन पत अन्तगरत धिनरन -482 सख्यन-23108/2023 शलीमतली कमलपेश शमनर व अन्य बननम उत्तर पदिपेश रनज्य व अन्य मम मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि दनरन पनररत आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 05.07.2023 कपे अनपुपनलन मम वनदिली मपुकदिमन तस्थिन अदभियपुकगण ककी ओर सपे एक सपुलहननमन न्यनयनलय कपे समक्ष पसतपुत दकयन गयन , धजसपे न्यनयनलय दनरन ददिनननांक 07.02.2024 कलो सत्यनदपत दकयन गयन हहै। उक आदिपेश मम सली .डली.ओ./समनज कल्यनण अधधिकनरली आगरन सपे सरकनर दनरन पनप्त धिनरनदश जलो वनदिली पक्ष कलो भिपुगतनन ककी गयली स्थिली , जमन करनकर ररपलोरर पपेदषित करनपे कपे धलयपे कहन गयन स्थिन। उक आदिपेश कपे अनपुपनलन मम समनज कल्यनण अधधिकनरली दनरन पतननांक-485/स०क०/ अत्य० उत्पली/2024-25 ददिनननांदकत 24.06.2024 दनरन इस आशय ककी आख्यन पपेदषित ककी गयली हहै दक पलीदड़ित शली सतलीश चन्द्र दनरन डनक सनांख्यन 306775 ददिनननांक 23.04.2024 मपु० 1,50,000/-रु० तस्थिन उनककी पपुतली कपु मनरली कनजल दनरन बबक डड नफ्र सनांख्यन-000382 ददिनननांक 19.04.2024 मपु० 1,50,000/-रु० न्यनयनलय कपे आदिपेश कपे अनपुपनलन मम अपनपे पनस्थिरनन पत ददिनननांक 09.05.2024 कपे सनस्थि उनकपे न्यनयनलय मम उपससस्थित हलोकर जमन करनयन गयन हहै, जलो उनकपे दनरन चनलनन कपे मनध्यम सपे रनजककीय कलोषि मम जमन दकयन जन चपुकन हहै। मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि दनरन पनररत आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 05.07.2023 कपे अनपुपनलन मम दिलोननों पक्षनों दनरन दिनधखिल सपुलहननमन सत्यनदपत करनपे ककी आख्यन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कलो भिपेजली जननली हहै। अततः कनयनरलय धलदपक कलो दनदिरदशत दकयन जनतन हहै दक दिलोननों पक्षनों कपे सपुलहननमन सत्यनदपत आदिपेश ककी पदत सपुलहननमन व उसकन सत्यनपन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय इलनहनबनदि कलो भिपेजनन सपुदनसशत करपे। पतनवलली वनसतपे अदग्रिम आदिपेश ददिनननांक 29.08.2024 कलो पपेश हलो। ह० अपठनलीय

03.07.2024 अपर सत न्यनयनधिलीश/दवशपेषि न्यनयनधिलीश (एस०सली०/एस०रली०एक्र), आगरन।" 7. Subsequently, the learned additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no.8 Agra, has passed a compromise verification order dated 7.8.2024 with an observation that both parties were appeared before the court below and they were also identified by their respective counsels. The terms and conditions of the compromise have been spelled out to the parties who have admitted the factum of the compromise and, accordingly, compromise has been verified. For ready reference, the order dated 7.8.2024 is quoted hereinbelow:- , न्यनयनलय सनांख्यन " न्यनयनलय अपर मपुख्य न्यनदयक मधजसरड पेर -08, आगरन। मपु०अ०सनां० 702/2022 रनज्य बननम सतलीश रनजन धिनरन-354,504,506 भिन०दिनां०सनां० स्थिननन-एत्मनदिदिदौलन, आगरन। ददिनननांक-07.08.2024 आदिपेश आज पतनवलली पपेश हहई। वनदिली कमलपेश शमनर एवनां अदभियपुक सतलीश रनजन उपससस्थित आयपे। वनदिली एवनां अदभियपुक पक्ष ककी ओर सपे ददिनननांक 21.08.2023 कलो पसतपुत रनजलीननमन (समझदौतन) पनस्थिरनन पत मय शपस्थिपत पर सपुनन गयन। वनदिली दनरन अपनपे पनस्थिरनन पत ददिनननांदकत 21.08.2023 मम कस्थिन दकयन गयन दक वनदिली एवनां अदभियपुक कपे मध्य समझदौतन हलो गयन हहै धजसकपे धलए वनदिली दनरन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय मम पनस्थिरनन पत अनांतगरत धिनरन 482 दि०प०सनां० सनांख्यन 25530/2023, आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 04.10.2023 पसतपुत दकयन गयन। वनदिली कमलपेश शमनर कपे रनजलीननमन पनस्थिरनन पत पर चसपन फलोरलो एवनां हसतनक्षर कलो उस कपे अधधिवकन शली जय शमनर दनरन एवनां अदभियपुक कपे चसपन फलोरलो एवनां हसतनक्षर कलो उनकपे अधधिवकन शली दिपेवदित्त शमनर दनरन पमनदणत कर ददिनननांक 08.01.2024 कलो तसदिलीक दकयन गयन हहै। उभियपक्षनों कलो रनजलीननमन मम अदभिधलधखित शतरनां कलो पढ़कर सपुननयन एवनां समझनयन गयन। उभियपक्षनों दनरन मनननलीय उच्च न्यनयनलय , इलनहनबनदि पनस्थिरनन पत अनांतगरत धिनरन 482 दि०प०सनां० सनांख्यन 25530/2023, आदिपेश ददिनननांदकत 04.10.2023 मम वदणरत सभिली शतरनां पर पपूणर सहमदत व्यक ककी गयली। तद्नपुसनर सनांधधिपत तरदिलीक दकयन गयन। पतनवलली दनयत ददिनननांक 23.08.2024 कलो पपेश हलो। ह० अपठनलीय 7/8/24 अपर मपुख्य न्यनदयक मधजसरड पेर, न्यनयनलय सनां0-8, आगरन।" 8. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that, in the above eventuality of the compromise took place between the parties and the aforementioned compromise verification order, the instant application may be allowed and the criminal proceeding initiated against the present applicants may be quashed. It is further submitted that both the parties have buried the hatchet and there is no grudges between them against each other. To quash the cognizance order as well as criminal proceeding, learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments of the Hon'ble Apex Court :- (i) B.S.Joshi & Others Vs. State of Haryana & Others; (2003) 4 SCC 675. (ii) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 667. (iii) Manoj Sharma Vs. State & Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1. (iv) Gyan Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303. (v) Narindra Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466.

9. In a recent judgment passed by a Three Judges' Bench of the Apex Court in the Case of Parbatbhai Aahir alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in AIR 2017 SC 4843, Hon'ble Supreme Court has summarized the ratio of all the cases decided earlier with respect to quashing of F.I.R./charge-sheet/criminal proceeding on the ground of settlement between the parties and expounded the ten categories in which application under Section 482 could be entertained for quashing the F.I.R./charge- sheet/criminal proceeding on the basis of compromise. Para no. 15 of the said judgement summarizing the proposition in this respect is reproduced below:- "15. (i) Section 482 preserves the inherent power of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognises and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court; (ii) The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non- compoundable. (iii) In forming an opinion whether a criminal proceeding or compliant should be quashed in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 482, the High Court must evaluate whether the ends of justice would justify the exercise of the inherent power; (iv) While the inherent power of the High Court has a wide ambit and plenitude it has to be exercised;(i) to secure the ends of justice or (ii) to prevent an abuse of the process of any court; (v) The decision as to whether a complaint or First Information Report should be quashed on the ground that the offender and victim have settled the dispute, revolves ultimately on the facts and circumstances of each case and no exhaustive elaboration of principles can be formulated; (vi) In exercise of the power under Section 482 and while dealing with a plea that the dispute has been settled, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the offence. Heinous and serious offences involving mental depravity or offences such as murder, rape and dacoity cannot approximately be quashed though the victim or the family of the victim have settled the dispute. Such offences are, truly speaking, not private in nature but have a serious impact upon society. The decision to continue with the trial in such cases is founded on the overriding element of public interest in punishing persons for serious offences; (vii) As distinguished from serious offences, there may be criminal cases which have an overwhelming or predominant element of a civil dispute. They stand on a distinct footing insofar as the exercise of the inherent power to quash is concerned; (viii) Criminal cases involving offences which arise from commercial, financial, mercantile, partnership or similar transactions with an essentially civil flavour may in appropriate situations fall for quashing where parties have settled the dispute; (ix) In such a case, the High Court may quash the criminal proceeding if in view of the compromise between the disputants, the possibility of a conviction is remote and the continuation of a criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice; and (x) There is yet an exception to the principle set out in propositions (viii) and (ix) above. Economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the state have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between private disputants. The High Court would be justified in declining to quash where the offender is involved in an activity akin to a financial or economic fraud or misdemeanour. The consequences of the act complained of upon the financial or economic system will weigh in the balance."

10. Certified copies of order dated 3.7.2024 and order dated 7.8.2024 are filed as Annexure no.6 and Annexure no.7 respectively.

11. Learned AGA has no objection, in case, the instant application is decided by this Court on the basis of compromise took place between the parties, which is duly verified by the court concerned.

12. Having considered the aforementioned compromise verification report as well as the compromise verification order and with the assistance of the aforesaid guidelines, keeping in view the nature of gravity and severity of the offence, which are more particular in private dispute, it is deemed proper that in order to meet the ends of justice, the present proceeding should be quashed. In result, dispute between the parties will put to an end, peace will be resorted and relationship between them will be smooth. No useful purpose would be served to keep the present matter pending inasmuch as both the parties have buried the hatchet and as the time passes, it will be difficult to prove the guilt of the accused. The continuation of criminal proceeding would cause oppression and prejudice.

13. In view of the aforesaid pronouncements of the Hon'ble Apex Court and in the light of the compromise arrived at between the parties, which has been duly verified by the concerned court below, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. The entire criminal proceeding of the aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

14. Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the concerned lower Court for necessary action. Order Date :- 2.1.2025/vkg