Balkar and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39163 of 2023 Applicant :- Balkar And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Surya Prakash Yadav Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Short counter affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party No. 2 today in Court, is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Surya Prakash Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶3This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 20.10.2014 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 8462 of 2023 (Ram Kishan Vs. Balkar and another), under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station-Kandhla, District-Shamli, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ F.T.C, Shamli.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicants and opposite party No. 2 are next door neighbours and on account of some misunderstanding and misgivings, the present criminal case has been instituted against the applicants, however with the intervention of respected members of both the family and society, parties have amicably and genuinely settled all their disputes and differences and now they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to a settlement-agreement dated 29.9.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 3 to this application.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that the said case is still at the stage of 244 Cr.P.C.

¶7Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, entire proceedings be quashed against the applicants.

¶8Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on behalf of the opposite party No. 2 and in paragraph-4 of the affidavit, the compromise made between the parties has been acknowledged and in paragraph-8 of the said affidavit, it has been further submitted that opposite party No. 2 no longer wishes to prosecute the applicants in the present case. He has submitted, on instructions, that opposite party No. 2 has no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶9This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of 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 the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶10Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶11Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 8462 of 2023 (Ram Kishan Vs. Balkar and another), under Sections 323, 452, 504, 506, 427 IPC, Police Station-Kandhla, District-Shamli, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ F.T.C, Shamli, are hereby quashed.

¶12This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 1.11.2023 KU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad