State v. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No

1. Mr. Abhinav Dwivedi, Advocate, filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

2. Heard Mr. Anurag Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Abhinav Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned counsel for the State.

3. The present application has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 17.02.2024 as well as entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (r) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj, on the basis of compromise.

4. On 18.02.2025, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order in Application u/s 528 BNSS No.4676 of 2025 (Sarvesh and Another vs. State of U.P. and Another):- "1. Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of Shri Abhinav Dwivedi, counsel for opposite party no.2, is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent as well as Shri Abhinav Dwivedi, counsel for opposite party no. 2.

3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have themselves compromised out of the Court on 29.01.2025 (Annexure-6 at page 34) and onwards reference whereof has been made in paragraph no. 13 of the application. He submits that the compromise application shall be filed before the court below and interregnum period, subject to verification, in the meantime, till the verification is done, interim protection be accorded.

5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that he has no objection to the same.

6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the application stands disposed of directing the applicants to approach the Court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj while filing present application along with certified copy of the order and a self-attested copy of the compromise application by 05.03.2025.

7. On the receipt of the same, the court below shall furnish the compromise so filed by the parties and shall conclude the process for verification by 22.05.2025.

8. Till the disposal of the compromise application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj.

9. In the event of default of any of the conditions by the applicants as referred to above, the interim protection shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench.

10. It is always open for the applicants to take legal recourse, subject to the fate of the outcome of the compromise application.

11. Needless to point out that due compliance on the aspect of compensation amount paid to be returned to the concerned District Social Welfare Officer be made."

5. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 18.02.2025, compromise between the parties has been verified by the Court below vide order dated 03.03.2025. Certified copy of the verification order has been annexed as Annexure-2 of the present application.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

7. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

8. Learned counsel for the parties submit that in the complaint case no compensation has been received by the victim.

9. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court: (i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675, (ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677, (iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1, (iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303, (v). 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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 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.

12. Accordingly, proceedings of summoning order dated 17.02.2024 as well as S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (r) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.

13. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 9.4.2025/Rahul.

1. Mr. Abhinav Dwivedi, Advocate, filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2 in Court today, which is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

2. Heard Mr. Anurag Dubey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Abhinav Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Rizwan Ahmad, learned counsel for the State.

3. The present application has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 17.02.2024 as well as entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (r) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj, on the basis of compromise.

4. On 18.02.2025, the co-ordinate Bench of this Court has passed the following order in Application u/s 528 BNSS No.4676 of 2025 (Sarvesh and Another vs. State of U.P. and Another):- "1. Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of Shri Abhinav Dwivedi, counsel for opposite party no.2, is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri Shailendra Kumar Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri S.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-respondent as well as Shri Abhinav Dwivedi, counsel for opposite party no. 2.

3. This application under Section 528 BNSS has been filed by the applicant to quash the entire proceedings of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have themselves compromised out of the Court on 29.01.2025 (Annexure-6 at page 34) and onwards reference whereof has been made in paragraph no. 13 of the application. He submits that the compromise application shall be filed before the court below and interregnum period, subject to verification, in the meantime, till the verification is done, interim protection be accorded.

5. Learned AGA on the other hand submits that he has no objection to the same.

6. Considering the submissions of the rival parties as well as stand taken by them, the application stands disposed of directing the applicants to approach the Court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj while filing present application along with certified copy of the order and a self-attested copy of the compromise application by 05.03.2025.

7. On the receipt of the same, the court below shall furnish the compromise so filed by the parties and shall conclude the process for verification by 22.05.2025.

8. Till the disposal of the compromise application, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in pursuance of S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3 (1) (r) SC/ST Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj.

9. In the event of default of any of the conditions by the applicants as referred to above, the interim protection shall stand vacated without reference to the Bench.

10. It is always open for the applicants to take legal recourse, subject to the fate of the outcome of the compromise application.

11. Needless to point out that due compliance on the aspect of compensation amount paid to be returned to the concerned District Social Welfare Officer be made."

5. In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 18.02.2025, compromise between the parties has been verified by the Court below vide order dated 03.03.2025. Certified copy of the verification order has been annexed as Annexure-2 of the present application.

6. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

7. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order, they have no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

8. Learned counsel for the parties submit that in the complaint case no compensation has been received by the victim.

9. This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court: (i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675, (ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677, (iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1, (iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303, (v). 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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 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.

12. Accordingly, proceedings of summoning order dated 17.02.2024 as well as S.S.T. No. 377 of 2024 (State Vs. Sarvesh and Another), and Case No. 123 of 2019, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3 (1) (r) S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Indergarh, District Kannauj, pending before the court of learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Kannauj, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed.

13. The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Order Date :- 9.4.2025/Rahul.