Mujaffar And 2 Others v. State Of U.P & Anr.

Heard Sri Meraj Ahmad Khan, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Krishna Madhaw Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned AGA for the State and perused the records.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants-Mujaffar, Afroj and Nahid with the prayer to allow this application under 482 Cr.P.C. and quash the charge sheet no.65 of 2018 dated 26.02.2018 as well as proceeding of S.T. No. 114 of 2018, arising out of Case Crime No. 90 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)Cha 3(1)da, 3(1)dha SC/ST Act, Police Station Tanda, District Rampur as well as summoning order dated 06.12.2018, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, SC/ST Act, Rampur and further with the prayer to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case during the pendency of this application.

As per office report dated 26.9.2022, compromise verification report of court concerned is on record.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that a compromise between the parties was referred for verification vide order dated 1.9.2022 passed by coordinate Bench this Court which has been duly verified by the court concerned on 15.9.2022 and a report to the said effect has been sent by the court concerned, as such the compromise entered between the parties is duly verified and the proceedings of the present matter be quashed.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned counsel for the State admitted the fact of compromise and stated that they have no objection if the proceeding of the aforesaid case is quashed against the applicant (s).

From the perusal of the record it is apparent that parties have entered in to compromise and have settled their dispute amicably, the said compromise has been also been verified by the trial court.

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (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; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant(s).

The charge sheet, summoning order as well as entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby quashed subject to the applicant (s) depositing Rs.10,000/- before the concerned trial court which shall be utilized by the District Legal Services Authority of the district.

The present application is allowed. (Samit Gopal, J.) Order Date :- 24.1.2025 Gaurav Kuls GAURAV KULSHRESTHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad