Anuj and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 28915 of 2023 Applicant :- Anuj And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Raj Kishor Mishra Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Affidavits, filed on behalf of opposite party no.2 and on behalf of victim today in Court, are taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Raj Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant no.1 and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the family and the society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences and they have decided to live separately and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that on the basis of the said compromise, a petition for divorce with mutual consent has been filed, which is pending before the court below.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that as per the compromise, the applicant no.1 has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues. Out of which, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- has already been paid to her and balance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- shall be paid to her at the time of final disposal of the petition filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise made between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶7Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed affidavits on behalf of opposite party no.2 as well as on behalf of victim and in para 6 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that parties have amicably settled their all disputes and differences and they have decided to live separately.

¶8Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has further submitted that as per the compromise, the applicant no.1 has agreed to pay a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- to opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues. Out of which, a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- has already been received by her and balance amount of Rs.5,00,000/- shall be received by her at the time of final disposal of the petition filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act. Further in para 8, it has been stated that opposite party no.2 does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and she has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶9Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of:-

(i). B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675.

(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation,

(2008) 9 SCC 677.

(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC

1.

(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.

(v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab,

(2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶11Wherein 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 Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶12Considering 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 present case.

¶13Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 4533 of 2022 (State Vs. Anuj and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 100 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 377, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Dankaur, District Gautam Buddh Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Gautam Buddh Nagar, are hereby quashed.

¶14This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 12.10.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad