The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others v. State of Punjab

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 14.01.2023, cognizance order dated 04.03.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.4308 of 2023 (State vs. Satyam Lamba) arising out of Case Crime No.418 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of Court and on account of compromise, they filed Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.47937 of 2023 and this Court by order dated 27.02.2024 has passed the following orders:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4308 of 2023 (State Vs. Satyam Lamba), arising out of Case Crime No. 418 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor as well as charge sheet dated 14.01.2023 and cognizance order dated 04.03.2023 in pursuance of compromise deed dated 01.07.2023 and 03.07.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the alleged incident one person received injuries. The said injuries are not serious in nature. Further, during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of the compromise deed dated 01.07.2023 and 03.07.2023 has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit, wherein it has been mentioned that opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the case. 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 process of law.

4. Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicant may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

5. In view of the above, the parties including the injured are directed to appear before the court concerned along with an application for verification of compromise deed so filed as well as a certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. 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 three months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.

6. 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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

7. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

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

4. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that in pursuance of this Court's order 27.02.2024, parties appeared before trial court and trial court on 07.05.2024 verified the parties through their counsels. Verification report is filed as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. He next submits that though injured has received injury but they have amicably settled the dispute without any undue pressure. Opposite party nos.2 & 3 do not want to pursue the case further and proceeding be quashed in terms of compromise.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts argued by counsel for the applicants. It is submitted that the informant and injured have compromised the matter.

6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble 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. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

9. Accordingly, the impugned criminal proceeding in Criminal Case No.4308 of 2023 (State vs. Satyam Lamba) arising out of Case Crime No.418 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor is hereby quashed.

10. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order dated: 11.07.2024/SKD SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the informant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 14.01.2023, cognizance order dated 04.03.2023 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.4308 of 2023 (State vs. Satyam Lamba) arising out of Case Crime No.418 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of Court and on account of compromise, they filed Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.47937 of 2023 and this Court by order dated 27.02.2024 has passed the following orders:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Sri V.P.Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4308 of 2023 (State Vs. Satyam Lamba), arising out of Case Crime No. 418 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor as well as charge sheet dated 14.01.2023 and cognizance order dated 04.03.2023 in pursuance of compromise deed dated 01.07.2023 and 03.07.2023.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the alleged incident one person received injuries. The said injuries are not serious in nature. Further, during the pendency of the proceedings, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of the compromise deed dated 01.07.2023 and 03.07.2023 has been annexed as Annexure-5 to the affidavit, wherein it has been mentioned that opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the case. 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 process of law.

4. Learned AGA, however, submits that it is the concerned court, which has to verify the fact as to whether the parties have entered into compromise, hence the applicant may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

5. In view of the above, the parties including the injured are directed to appear before the court concerned along with an application for verification of compromise deed so filed as well as a certified copy of this order within three weeks from today. 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 three months from today. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statement of the parties as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not.

6. 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 applicant to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

7. Till verification of compromise between the parties by the court concerned, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid case.

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

4. Learned counsel for the applicant next submits that in pursuance of this Court's order 27.02.2024, parties appeared before trial court and trial court on 07.05.2024 verified the parties through their counsels. Verification report is filed as Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit. He next submits that though injured has received injury but they have amicably settled the dispute without any undue pressure. Opposite party nos.2 & 3 do not want to pursue the case further and proceeding be quashed in terms of compromise.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts argued by counsel for the applicants. It is submitted that the informant and injured have compromised the matter.

6. Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

7. The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble 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. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

9. Accordingly, the impugned criminal proceeding in Criminal Case No.4308 of 2023 (State vs. Satyam Lamba) arising out of Case Crime No.418 of 2022, under sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Dhampur, District Bijnor, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bijnor is hereby quashed.

10. This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order dated: 11.07.2024/SKD SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad