High Court · 2025

Heard Mr. Sanjay Mishra, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Pankaj Mishra, the learned counsel representing the prosecutrix/first informant/opposite party- 2 who has put in appearance by filing his vakalatnama today in Court, which is taken on record. Perused the record. Applicants- Pushpendra Singh And Another who are charge sheeted accused and facing trail before Court below have approached this Court by means of present application under section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon ble Court be pleased to allow this application and quash the proceedings of Session Case No. 103 of 2020, '(Smt. Roopa Versus Pushpendra Singh & another) arising out of Case Crime No. 32 of 2019 U/s 452, 376/511, 354, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, of Police Station- Balrai, District-Etawah, on the basis of compromise dated 24.01.2025 between the parties. It is further pleased to stay the further proceeding of Session Case No. 103 of 2020, (Smt. Roopa Versus Pushpendra Singh & another) arising out of Case Crime ,No. 32 of 2019 under section 452, 376/511, 354, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, of Police Station-Balrai District-Etawah, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Etawah and/or be pleased to pass such other and further orders, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Otherwise the Applicants would suffer irreparable loss.," At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that applicants had earlier approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 No. 39158 of 2024 (Pushpendra Singh and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another), which was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh vide order dated 9.1.2025. For ready reference the same is reproduced herein under: "1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Mishra, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A..G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Pankaj Mishra, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2.

2. Perused the record.

3.Applicants-Pushpendra Singh and Anil, who are charge sheeted accused, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 103 of 2020 (Smt. Roopa Vs. Pushpendra Singh and another) arising out of Case Crime NO. 32 of 2019 under Section 452, 376, 511, 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Balrai, District-Etawah in view of the compromise dated 13.09.2024 entered into by the parties.

4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during the pendency of aforementioned sessions case, parties amicably settled their dispute out side the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between applicants, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of compromise was reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 13.09.2024

5. At this juncture, court raised a pointed query as to whether the said compromise has been filed before court below or not, the learned counsel for applicants fairly submits that the said compromise has not yet been filed before court below.

6. In view of above, this application is misconceived at this stage and is therefore liable to be dismissed at this stage with liberty to applicant to file a fresh application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after the compromise entered into by the parties has been filed before court below.

7. The present application is accordingly with liberty aforesaid. " It is next contended by the learned counsel for applicants that subsequent to the order dated 9.1.2025, the compromise entered into by the parties was filed before Court below. Certified copy of the same is on record as Annexure-10 to the affidavit filed in support of the present application. On the aforesaid premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that the dispute between the parties is a purely private dispute and not a crime against State or society. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and on basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, a comprosmise was entered into and the same was reduced to writing. Subsequently the same has been filed before Court below. As such the compromise entered into by the parties has been acted upon. He, therefore, submits that no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicants. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the chances of conviction of accused applicants are not only remote but also bleak. As such, present application is liable to be allowed. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application. He submits that applicants have been charge sheeted under section 376 IPC also. Referring to the judgement of Supreme Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR online 2019 SC 1716 the learned A.G.A submits that compromise entered into by the parties in matters relating to rape and sexual assault in meaningless as the same cannot be terminated by Court in view of the compromise entered into by the parties. He, therefore, contends that irrespective of the compromise entered into by the parties the present application is liable to be dismissed. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application is not only borne out from the record but further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicants with reference to the record. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Arshad ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Heard Mr. Sanjay Mishra, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Pankaj Mishra, the learned counsel representing the prosecutrix/first informant/opposite party- 2 who has put in appearance by filing his vakalatnama today in Court, which is taken on record. Perused the record. Applicants- Pushpendra Singh And Another who are charge sheeted accused and facing trail before Court below have approached this Court by means of present application under section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon ble Court be pleased to allow this application and quash the proceedings of Session Case No. 103 of 2020, '(Smt. Roopa Versus Pushpendra Singh & another) arising out of Case Crime No. 32 of 2019 U/s 452, 376/511, 354, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, of Police Station- Balrai, District-Etawah, on the basis of compromise dated 24.01.2025 between the parties. It is further pleased to stay the further proceeding of Session Case No. 103 of 2020, (Smt. Roopa Versus Pushpendra Singh & another) arising out of Case Crime ,No. 32 of 2019 under section 452, 376/511, 354, 323, 504 & 506 I.P.C and 3(2)(5) SC/ST Act, of Police Station-Balrai District-Etawah, pending in the court of Special Judge SC/ST Act, Etawah and/or be pleased to pass such other and further orders, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case. Otherwise the Applicants would suffer irreparable loss.," At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that applicants had earlier approached this Court by means of Application U/S 482 No. 39158 of 2024 (Pushpendra Singh and Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another), which was dismissed with liberty to file a fresh vide order dated 9.1.2025. For ready reference the same is reproduced herein under: "1. Heard Mr. Sanjay Mishra, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A..G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and Mr. Pankaj Mishra, the learned counsel representing first informant/opposite party-2.

2. Perused the record.

3.Applicants-Pushpendra Singh and Anil, who are charge sheeted accused, have approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the entire proceedings of Sessions Case No. 103 of 2020 (Smt. Roopa Vs. Pushpendra Singh and another) arising out of Case Crime NO. 32 of 2019 under Section 452, 376, 511, 354, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3 (2) (5) SC/ST Act, Police Station-Balrai, District-Etawah in view of the compromise dated 13.09.2024 entered into by the parties.

4. Learned counsel for applicants submits that during the pendency of aforementioned sessions case, parties amicably settled their dispute out side the court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between applicants, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of compromise was reduced in writing by way of a compromise deed dated 13.09.2024

5. At this juncture, court raised a pointed query as to whether the said compromise has been filed before court below or not, the learned counsel for applicants fairly submits that the said compromise has not yet been filed before court below.

6. In view of above, this application is misconceived at this stage and is therefore liable to be dismissed at this stage with liberty to applicant to file a fresh application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. after the compromise entered into by the parties has been filed before court below.

7. The present application is accordingly with liberty aforesaid. " It is next contended by the learned counsel for applicants that subsequent to the order dated 9.1.2025, the compromise entered into by the parties was filed before Court below. Certified copy of the same is on record as Annexure-10 to the affidavit filed in support of the present application. On the aforesaid premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that the dispute between the parties is a purely private dispute and not a crime against State or society. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and on basis of settlement arrived at between the parties, a comprosmise was entered into and the same was reduced to writing. Subsequently the same has been filed before Court below. As such the compromise entered into by the parties has been acted upon. He, therefore, submits that no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicants. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties, the chances of conviction of accused applicants are not only remote but also bleak. As such, present application is liable to be allowed. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has opposed the present application. He submits that applicants have been charge sheeted under section 376 IPC also. Referring to the judgement of Supreme Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR online 2019 SC 1716 the learned A.G.A submits that compromise entered into by the parties in matters relating to rape and sexual assault in meaningless as the same cannot be terminated by Court in view of the compromise entered into by the parties. He, therefore, contends that irrespective of the compromise entered into by the parties the present application is liable to be dismissed. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application is not only borne out from the record but further the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicants with reference to the record. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. In view of above, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 5.3.2025 Arshad ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad