Rashid Ali v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8214 of 2023 Applicant :- Rashid Ali Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shikhar Tandon Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Lal Dev Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Shri Lal Dev Chaursiya, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶2Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that applicant is the husband of opposite party no.2 and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicant.

¶3Vide order dated 02.12.2021, this Court in Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 No.17634 of 2021 (Rashid Ali Vs. State of U.P.) had directed the parties to appear before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court and to explore the possibility of settling the dispute through mediation.

¶4Pursuant to the said order dated 02.12.2021, the parties appeared before the Mediation Centre and with the help of the mediators, the dispute between the parties has amicably been settled and a settlement agreement dated 25.05.2022 has been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 5 to this application.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that pursuant to the said settlement agreement, the parties have restored their relationship and are now living together as husband and wife and are leading a happy married life along with their minor child.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement drawn 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 acknowledged the said settlement agreement drawn between the parties. He has next, on instructions, submitted that opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶8Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9his 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.

¶10Wherein 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.

¶11Considering 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.

¶12Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 51 of 2023 (State Vs. Rashid Ali), arising out of Case Crime No. 208 of 2021, under Sections 498-A 323, 504, 307 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Tronica City, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Court No.4, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

¶13This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 18.10.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad