Smt Jyoti Dharmani and 4 Others v. State of UP and Another

Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12145 of 2018 Applicant :- Smt Jyoti Dharmani And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahesh Chandra Tiwari,Kiran Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Pandey,Ashwini Kumar Tripathi,Pankaj Dwivedi Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional

Government

Advocate

for

the State/opposite party No.1, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and perused the record. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the order dated

28.02.2018 and proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1722 of 2016 (Ashok Chawala vs. Smt. Jyoti Dharmani and others), under Sections 323, 384, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Chhatta, District Agra pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-12th, Agra. Filtering out unnecessary details, the basic facts in brief, which are necessary for disposal of this case as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants are that the opposite party no. 2 moved an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 17.08.2016 against the applicants, which was treated as a complaint case and after recording the statements under Sections 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the applicants have been summoned to face the trial vide order dated 28.02.2018. Thereafter, the parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court and a compromise application between the parties was moved on 02.03.2023 before the court below, which was directed to be verified by the concerned court below on 30.05.2023. Pursuant to aforesaid order dated 30.05.2023, the compromise between the parties concerned has been verified by the concerned court below on

18.07.2023, copy of the same is on record. On the strength of aforesaid facts, it is submitted that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned charge-sheet against the applicants after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and has no objection if the Court quashes the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants. After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for

the

parties,

I

find

that

after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost. The Apex Court in case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Ramgopal and another Vs The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 Supreme (SC) 529 after wholesome treatment has laid down guidelines for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of non-compoundable offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. on the basis of compromise, wherein quashing of proceeding of criminal cases which involved non compoundable offences has been approved by the Apex Court if the nature of the offence is private in nature and does not have a serious impact on society. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court as mentioned above, I find that the case in hand does not have grave and wider social ramifications and the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties, therefore this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end. In view of the above, order dated 28.02.2018 and proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1722 of 2016 (Ashok Chawala vs. Smt. Jyoti Dharmani and others) against the applicants are hereby quashed. The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above. Order Date :- 26.10.2023 Zafar High Court of Judicature at Allahabad