High Court · 2025

1. Heard Sri Vimal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rizwan Ahmad, learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the proceedings of Case No. 12611 of 2023, State v. Rohit Rai & others, charge-sheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Crime No. 143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra.

3. Earlier, the applicants preferred Application U/s 528 BNSS No. 41224 of 2024, wherein this Court has passed the following order dated 03.12.2024: "1. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction in the application during the course of the day.

2. Heard Mr. Vimal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned counsel for the State.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.12611 of 2023 (State v. Rohit Rai & others) based on Chargesheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Case Crime No.143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into compromise. The compromise deed has been moved before the Court concerned mentioning therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, copy of the said compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure-5 to this application. He further submits that husband and wife are living separately. 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. 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 as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 do not dispute the correctness of the aforesaid facts.

6. In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed and certified copy of this order. 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.

7. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the order verifying the compromise deed and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

8. For a period of two months or till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

9. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise has been verified by order dated 18.1.2025 passed by Additional Civil Judge-II, Sonbhadra. A copy of the said order has been brought on record as Annexure-3 to the petition.

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. 12611 of 2023, State v. Rohit Rai & others, charge-sheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Crime No. 143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra, 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 :- 27.2.2025 DS DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Sri Vimal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Rizwan Ahmad, learned AGA for the State, and perused the record.

2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the proceedings of Case No. 12611 of 2023, State v. Rohit Rai & others, charge-sheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Crime No. 143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra.

3. Earlier, the applicants preferred Application U/s 528 BNSS No. 41224 of 2024, wherein this Court has passed the following order dated 03.12.2024: "1. Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to make necessary correction in the application during the course of the day.

2. Heard Mr. Vimal Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned counsel for the State.

3. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No.12611 of 2023 (State v. Rohit Rai & others) based on Chargesheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Case Crime No.143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and have entered into compromise. The compromise deed has been moved before the Court concerned mentioning therein that they have entered into compromise and they do not want to press the case, copy of the said compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure-5 to this application. He further submits that husband and wife are living separately. 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. 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 as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 do not dispute the correctness of the aforesaid facts.

6. In view of the above, the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with copy of compromise deed and certified copy of this order. 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.

7. The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the order verifying the compromise deed and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

8. For a period of two months or till verification of compromise between the parties by the Court concerned, whichever is earlier, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case.

9. With the aforesaid directions, this application is finally disposed of."

4. In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise has been verified by order dated 18.1.2025 passed by Additional Civil Judge-II, Sonbhadra. A copy of the said order has been brought on record as Annexure-3 to the petition.

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. 12611 of 2023, State v. Rohit Rai & others, charge-sheet dated 02.10.2022 arising out of Crime No. 143 of 2022, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 342 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Obra, District Sonbhadra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonbhadra, 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 :- 27.2.2025 DS DIGAMBER SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad