Others v. State of Up And Another)

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicants, is taken on record. By way of supplementary affidavit, acquittal order of applicant nos. 3 & 4, namely, Rahul & Homriddha, has been filed.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to delete the names of applicants nos. 3 & 4 from the array of parties during the course of the day.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant nos. 1 & 2, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

4. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the Summoning Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as the entire criminal proceeding in Session Trial No. 241 of 2013 (State Vs. Ompal and Others), under Section 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar, arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2022 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge 1, Gautam Buddha Nagar on the basis of compromise between the opposite party no.2 and applicant no.1 and 2 on 06.12.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant nos. 1 & 2 and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and entered into a compromise dated 06.12.2023, thereafter, applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing Application U/S 482 No. 493 of 2024 (Ompal Sharma Alias Pappu And 3 Others vs. State of Up And Another) with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.03.2024 passed following order:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no. 1, and Sri Narayan Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 20.04.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Gautam Buddha Nagar in Session Trial No. 241 of 2023, State v. Ompal and others, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2012 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddha Nagar pending in the Court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge- Ist, Gautam Buddha Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the alleged incident one person received injuries. In the opinion of the doctor, the said injuries were simple in nature. Further, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of the compromise deed dated 06.12.2023 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 concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that he has no objection if the proceedings are quashed.

6. 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 applicants may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

7. 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.

8. 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 applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

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

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

6. In pursuance of order of this Court dated 11.03.2024, the Trial court vide order dated 10.04.2024 verified the parties as well as compromise application through their counsels. Verification report dated 10.04.2024 has been filed with the present 482 Cr.P.C. application as Annexure-7. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

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

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Accordingly, the impugned Summoning Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as the entire criminal proceeding in Session Trial No. 241 of 2013 (State Vs. Ompal and Others), under Section 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar, arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2022 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge 1st, Gautam Buddha Nagar, are hereby quashed.

12. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Aditya ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Supplementary affidavit filed today by learned counsel for the applicants, is taken on record. By way of supplementary affidavit, acquittal order of applicant nos. 3 & 4, namely, Rahul & Homriddha, has been filed.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to delete the names of applicants nos. 3 & 4 from the array of parties during the course of the day.

3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant nos. 1 & 2, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

4. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the Summoning Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as the entire criminal proceeding in Session Trial No. 241 of 2013 (State Vs. Ompal and Others), under Section 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar, arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2022 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge 1, Gautam Buddha Nagar on the basis of compromise between the opposite party no.2 and applicant no.1 and 2 on 06.12.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant nos. 1 & 2 and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and entered into a compromise dated 06.12.2023, thereafter, applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing Application U/S 482 No. 493 of 2024 (Ompal Sharma Alias Pappu And 3 Others vs. State of Up And Another) with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 11.03.2024 passed following order:- "1. Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants is taken on record.

2. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri V.P. Tripathi, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no. 1, and Sri Narayan Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 20.04.2012 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, District Gautam Buddha Nagar in Session Trial No. 241 of 2023, State v. Ompal and others, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2012 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, Police Station Surajpur, District Gautam Buddha Nagar pending in the Court of the Additional District & Sessions Judge- Ist, Gautam Buddha Nagar.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in the alleged incident one person received injuries. In the opinion of the doctor, the said injuries were simple in nature. Further, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them, copy of the compromise deed dated 06.12.2023 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 concerned and the same is not only sheer wastage of time of the Court but also abuse of process of law.

5. Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that he has no objection if the proceedings are quashed.

6. 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 applicants may approach the concerned court and move an application with respect to compromise between the parties, which will be decided in accordance with law.

7. 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.

8. 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 applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.

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

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

6. In pursuance of order of this Court dated 11.03.2024, the Trial court vide order dated 10.04.2024 verified the parties as well as compromise application through their counsels. Verification report dated 10.04.2024 has been filed with the present 482 Cr.P.C. application as Annexure-7. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their private and civil dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

7. Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

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

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Accordingly, the impugned Summoning Order dated 20.04.2012 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gautam Buddha Nagar as well as the entire criminal proceeding in Session Trial No. 241 of 2013 (State Vs. Ompal and Others), under Section 307, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Surajpur, District- Gautam Buddha Nagar, arising out of Case No. 3487 of 2022 as well as Case Crime No. 46 of 2012, pending in the Court of learned Additional District and Sessions Judge 1st, Gautam Buddha Nagar, are hereby quashed.

12. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 1.8.2025 Aditya ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad