Sandeep Kumar Upadhyay and others v. State of U.P. and another, wherein on

applicants, Shri Sunil Pratap Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State as well as Shri Anand Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party No.2.

3. The applicants herein had filed an Application under Section 482 No. 39570 of 2011, Sandeep Kumar Upadhyay and others vs. State of U.P. and another, wherein on 02.08.2022 following orders have been passed: "Mr. Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants filed an affidavit on behalf of applicants in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same. Heard Mr. Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet no.4 of 2011 dated 28.08.2011 as well as cognizance order dated 27.09.2011 and the entire further proceeding of Criminal Case No.2558 of 2011 (State Vs. Sandeep Kmar and others), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties including the injured persons have amicable settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered between them. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 as well as the injured persons before the Court concerned mentioning therein that parties have entered into compromise and they do not want to proceed with the case, copy of the said compromise has been annexed to the 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 the 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 parties 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 the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today and be permitted to file a proper compromise deed. 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 two months 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? 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, this application is finally disposed of. "

4. Thereafter Criminal Misc. Time Extension Application was also preferred, in which on 14.09.2022, following orders were passed: "Ref:- Criminal Misc. Time Extension Application. By order dated 02.08.2022 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the Court below along with certified copy of this order within two weeks to file proper compromise deed but the applicants neither appeared before the Court below nor filed the compromise deed as directed by the aforesaid order due to the reasons as detailed in the affidavit along with the time extension application. Therefore, the applicants moved the instant criminal misc. time extension application with a prayer to grant two weeks' further time to appear before the Court below and file compromise deed in compliance of the order dated 02.08.2022 of this Court. Under the circumstances, the instant time extension application is allowed. The cause shown in the affidavit in support of time extension application is sufficient. In view of the above, two weeks' further time is granted to the applicants to appear before the Court below and file proper compromise deed in compliance of the order dated 02.08.2022. In case, the parties appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period along with the certified copy of this order and file proper compromise deed. 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 two months 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? 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, this time extension application is disposed of. "

5. Documents filed in the present application reveals that a compromise have been entered into between the parties and the same has been verified by the court below Annexure-10 at page 65 of the paper-book. Relevant averments have been made in paragraph 12 which is quoted hereinunder: "12. That in pursuance of order of this Hon'ble Court applicants filed a written compromise between the parties before the court below on 20.09.2022 and the same was verified on 30.09.2022 after recording statements of the parties. In this regard reference may be made to written verified compromise between the parties filed before the court below on 20.09.2022, statements of the parties being Subhash, Shankuntla, Seema and Reema recorded during the verification proceedings on 20.09.2022, verification by the court below and verification order dated 30.09.2022, true copy whereof is being filed here with and marked as Annexure No.8, 9 and 10 to this affidavit."

6. Learned counsel for the applicants has also invited attention towards paragraph 13 which reads as under: "13. That opposite party no. has also returned the amount received as compensation under section S.C./S.T. Act on 06.02.2025. In this regard reference may be made to receipt of amount deposit by opposite party no.2, true copy whereof is being filed here with and marked as Annexure No.11 to this affidavit."

7. Thus, it is prayed that the proceedings be quashed.

8. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, Shri Anand Kumar, has not disputed the factum of deposit of the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 6250/- and further according to him, the parties have already entered into compromise and the same stands verified also. He also places on record true copy of the deposit challan showing deposit of the compensation amount by the opposite party No. 2.

9. Learned AGA does not dispute the said factum also.

10. Considering the submission of the parties and stand taken by them, the application stands allowed.

11. Proceedings in the Charge-sheet No.04/2011 dated 28.08.2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 984 of 2011 as well as cognizance order dated 27.09.2011 and entire proceedings of its consequent Case being Special Session Trial No. 497 of 2018 (old Case No. 2558 of 2011), State Vs. Sandeep Kumar Upadhyaya & others, Under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(10) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bakhira, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T Act), Sant Kabir Nagar, insofar as it pertains to applicants are hereby quashed.

12. The deposit challan is retained and marked as appendix- A. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 K.K.Tiwari

applicants, Shri Sunil Pratap Singh, learned State Law Officer for the State as well as Shri Anand Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party No.2.

3. The applicants herein had filed an Application under Section 482 No. 39570 of 2011, Sandeep Kumar Upadhyay and others vs. State of U.P. and another, wherein on 02.08.2022 following orders have been passed: "Mr. Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants filed an affidavit on behalf of applicants in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same. Heard Mr. Prabhakar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge sheet no.4 of 2011 dated 28.08.2011 as well as cognizance order dated 27.09.2011 and the entire further proceeding of Criminal Case No.2558 of 2011 (State Vs. Sandeep Kmar and others), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties including the injured persons have amicable settled their dispute and a compromise has been entered between them. In this regard, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 as well as the injured persons before the Court concerned mentioning therein that parties have entered into compromise and they do not want to proceed with the case, copy of the said compromise has been annexed to the 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 the 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 parties 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 the above, both the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order within two weeks from today and be permitted to file a proper compromise deed. 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 two months 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? 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, this application is finally disposed of. "

4. Thereafter Criminal Misc. Time Extension Application was also preferred, in which on 14.09.2022, following orders were passed: "Ref:- Criminal Misc. Time Extension Application. By order dated 02.08.2022 of this Court, the parties were directed to appear before the Court below along with certified copy of this order within two weeks to file proper compromise deed but the applicants neither appeared before the Court below nor filed the compromise deed as directed by the aforesaid order due to the reasons as detailed in the affidavit along with the time extension application. Therefore, the applicants moved the instant criminal misc. time extension application with a prayer to grant two weeks' further time to appear before the Court below and file compromise deed in compliance of the order dated 02.08.2022 of this Court. Under the circumstances, the instant time extension application is allowed. The cause shown in the affidavit in support of time extension application is sufficient. In view of the above, two weeks' further time is granted to the applicants to appear before the Court below and file proper compromise deed in compliance of the order dated 02.08.2022. In case, the parties appear before the Court below within the aforesaid period along with the certified copy of this order and file proper compromise deed. 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 two months 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? 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, this time extension application is disposed of. "

5. Documents filed in the present application reveals that a compromise have been entered into between the parties and the same has been verified by the court below Annexure-10 at page 65 of the paper-book. Relevant averments have been made in paragraph 12 which is quoted hereinunder: "12. That in pursuance of order of this Hon'ble Court applicants filed a written compromise between the parties before the court below on 20.09.2022 and the same was verified on 30.09.2022 after recording statements of the parties. In this regard reference may be made to written verified compromise between the parties filed before the court below on 20.09.2022, statements of the parties being Subhash, Shankuntla, Seema and Reema recorded during the verification proceedings on 20.09.2022, verification by the court below and verification order dated 30.09.2022, true copy whereof is being filed here with and marked as Annexure No.8, 9 and 10 to this affidavit."

6. Learned counsel for the applicants has also invited attention towards paragraph 13 which reads as under: "13. That opposite party no. has also returned the amount received as compensation under section S.C./S.T. Act on 06.02.2025. In this regard reference may be made to receipt of amount deposit by opposite party no.2, true copy whereof is being filed here with and marked as Annexure No.11 to this affidavit."

7. Thus, it is prayed that the proceedings be quashed.

8. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, Shri Anand Kumar, has not disputed the factum of deposit of the compensation amount to the tune of Rs. 6250/- and further according to him, the parties have already entered into compromise and the same stands verified also. He also places on record true copy of the deposit challan showing deposit of the compensation amount by the opposite party No. 2.

9. Learned AGA does not dispute the said factum also.

10. Considering the submission of the parties and stand taken by them, the application stands allowed.

11. Proceedings in the Charge-sheet No.04/2011 dated 28.08.2011 arising out of Case Crime No. 984 of 2011 as well as cognizance order dated 27.09.2011 and entire proceedings of its consequent Case being Special Session Trial No. 497 of 2018 (old Case No. 2558 of 2011), State Vs. Sandeep Kumar Upadhyaya & others, Under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(10) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Bakhira, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the Court of Special Judge (S.C./S.T Act), Sant Kabir Nagar, insofar as it pertains to applicants are hereby quashed.

12. The deposit challan is retained and marked as appendix- A. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 K.K.Tiwari