Vishal Dohare v. State of U.P. and Another). For ready reference, the same is reproduced hereinbel

1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Yadav, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Rajendra Prasad, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2.

2. Perused the record.

3. Applicant-Vikas Dohare, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following relief:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the charge sheet no. 25 of 2020 dated 24.01.2020, as well as entire proceeding of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019 U/s 363,376, 354-A, 323, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4POCSO Act, Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court, No. 9, District Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 04.07.2024 taken place between the both parties, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. It is further may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019 U/s 363, 376, 354-A, 323, Section 3/4 POCSO 506 of I.P.C. and Act, Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court, No. 9, District Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 04.07.2024 taken place between the both parties, during the pendency of the present application. And/or pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that though applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused and facing trial before Court below, however, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case as have emerged on record, the criminal prosecution of applicant cannot be sustained any further. As such, present application is liable to be allowed.

5. In furtherance of aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for applicant submits that during pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the Court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of compromise was reduced to writing by way of agreement/compromise. Original compromise has been brought on record at page 42 of the paper book. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that since parties have entered into a compromise, therefore, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties the chances of conviction of applicant are not only remote but also bleak.

6. It is then contended by the learned counsel for applicant that proceedings in respect of co-accused Vishal Dohare, have already been quashed by this Court by means of a order dated 11.08.2023 passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 19999 of 2023 (Vishal Dohare Vs. State of U.P. and Another). For ready reference, the same is reproduced hereinbelow:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet No. 25 of 2020 dated 24.01.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020(State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019, under Sections- 363, 354-A, 323, 506 I.P.C., and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Chirgaon, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 9, Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 15.04.2023.

3. The case was heard on 29.05.2023 and the Court has passed the following order:- "1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Om Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned State counsel and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the parties have entered into compromise, copy of which is annexed as annexure no. 4 to the affidavit in support of present 482 Cr.P.C. application. It is argued that as such the present proceedings be quashed.

4. Looking to the facts of the case, it is provided that the applicant shall file the said compromise within a period of two weeks from today before the court concerned who shall verify the same within three weeks thereafter and send his report to this Court.

5. List on 24.07.2023.

6. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant Vishal Dohare in Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019, under Sections 363, 354-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Jhansi."

4. Pursuant to order dated 29.05.2023, compromise has been verified by the trial Court vide order dated 08.06.2023 and the same has been received to this Court from Additional Session Judge, Court No. 4(POCSO Act), Jhansi vide letter dated 08.06.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that opposite party No. 2 lodged FIR dated 19.11.2019 against two accused persons, namely, Vikash Dohare and Dindayal Dangi, and the applicant was not named in the said FIR. He next submitted that later on, name of applicant has been mentioned in the charge sheet dated 24.01.2020 on the basis of statement of victim under Sectiion 161 Cr.P.C. He next submitted that as the name of applicant was wrongly mentioned in the charge sheet, parties entered into compromise on 15.04.2023. He next submitted that in light of compromise entered between the parties, criminal proceeding against the applicant may be quashed.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has has not objected the aforesaid facts and submitted that in case proceedings against the applicant is quashed, he would have no objection.

7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

8. Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed so far as applicant@Vishal Dohare is concerned .

9. The present application is, accordingly allowed.

10. No order as to costs."

7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the present application. Learned A.G.A. contends that offence complained of relates to rape and sexual assault. In view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR Online 2019 SC 1716, there can be no compromise in matters of rape and sexual assault. He, therefore, submits that present application is liable to be dismissed.

8. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State, and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record, but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.

10. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

11. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Imtiyaz IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

1. Heard Mr. Om Prakash Yadav, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Rajendra Prasad, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2.

2. Perused the record.

3. Applicant-Vikas Dohare, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following relief:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the charge sheet no. 25 of 2020 dated 24.01.2020, as well as entire proceeding of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019 U/s 363,376, 354-A, 323, 506 of I.P.C. and Section 3/4POCSO Act, Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court, No. 9, District Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 04.07.2024 taken place between the both parties, otherwise the applicant shall suffer irreparable loss and injury. It is further may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019 U/s 363, 376, 354-A, 323, Section 3/4 POCSO 506 of I.P.C. and Act, Police Station Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court, No. 9, District Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 04.07.2024 taken place between the both parties, during the pendency of the present application. And/or pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. Learned counsel for applicant submits that though applicant is a named and charge sheeted accused and facing trial before Court below, however, in view of the peculiar facts and circumstance of the case as have emerged on record, the criminal prosecution of applicant cannot be sustained any further. As such, present application is liable to be allowed.

5. In furtherance of aforesaid submission, the learned counsel for applicant submits that during pendency of aforementioned criminal case, parties amicably settled their dispute outside the Court. On the basis of settlement so arrived at between the parties, a compromise was entered into. Subsequently, the terms of compromise was reduced to writing by way of agreement/compromise. Original compromise has been brought on record at page 42 of the paper book. On the above premise, the learned counsel for applicant submits that since parties have entered into a compromise, therefore, no useful purpose shall be served in prolonging the criminal prosecution of applicant. In view of the compromise entered into by the parties the chances of conviction of applicant are not only remote but also bleak.

6. It is then contended by the learned counsel for applicant that proceedings in respect of co-accused Vishal Dohare, have already been quashed by this Court by means of a order dated 11.08.2023 passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 19999 of 2023 (Vishal Dohare Vs. State of U.P. and Another). For ready reference, the same is reproduced hereinbelow:- "1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet No. 25 of 2020 dated 24.01.2020 as well as entire proceedings of Session Trial No. 61 of 2020(State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019, under Sections- 363, 354-A, 323, 506 I.P.C., and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, Police Station- Chirgaon, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of learned Additional District Judge, Court No. 9, Jhansi on the basis of compromise dated 15.04.2023.

3. The case was heard on 29.05.2023 and the Court has passed the following order:- "1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Om Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Rajendra Prasad, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned State counsel and perused the record.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the parties have entered into compromise, copy of which is annexed as annexure no. 4 to the affidavit in support of present 482 Cr.P.C. application. It is argued that as such the present proceedings be quashed.

4. Looking to the facts of the case, it is provided that the applicant shall file the said compromise within a period of two weeks from today before the court concerned who shall verify the same within three weeks thereafter and send his report to this Court.

5. List on 24.07.2023.

6. Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant Vishal Dohare in Session Trial No. 61 of 2020 (State Vs. Vikas Dohare and another) arising out of Case Crime No. 234 of 2019, under Sections 363, 354-A, 323, 506 IPC and Section 7/8 POCSO Act, P.S. Chirgaon, District Jhansi, pending in the court of Additional District Judge, Court No.9, Jhansi."

4. Pursuant to order dated 29.05.2023, compromise has been verified by the trial Court vide order dated 08.06.2023 and the same has been received to this Court from Additional Session Judge, Court No. 4(POCSO Act), Jhansi vide letter dated 08.06.2023.

5. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that opposite party No. 2 lodged FIR dated 19.11.2019 against two accused persons, namely, Vikash Dohare and Dindayal Dangi, and the applicant was not named in the said FIR. He next submitted that later on, name of applicant has been mentioned in the charge sheet dated 24.01.2020 on the basis of statement of victim under Sectiion 161 Cr.P.C. He next submitted that as the name of applicant was wrongly mentioned in the charge sheet, parties entered into compromise on 15.04.2023. He next submitted that in light of compromise entered between the parties, criminal proceeding against the applicant may be quashed.

6. Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has has not objected the aforesaid facts and submitted that in case proceedings against the applicant is quashed, he would have no objection.

7. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

8. Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed so far as applicant@Vishal Dohare is concerned .

9. The present application is, accordingly allowed.

10. No order as to costs."

7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. has vehemently opposed the present application. Learned A.G.A. contends that offence complained of relates to rape and sexual assault. In view of the law laid down by Apex Court in Rampal Vs. State of Haryana, AIR Online 2019 SC 1716, there can be no compromise in matters of rape and sexual assault. He, therefore, submits that present application is liable to be dismissed.

8. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same.

9. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State, and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record, but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application.

10. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

11. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Imtiyaz IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad