Sharafat and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 89 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40390 of 2023 Applicant :- Sharafat And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kr. Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ayush Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶2The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated 16.02.2018, summoning order dated 28.06.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Case No.42479 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.61 of 2017 (State vs. Sharafat & others), under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 323, 325 I.P.C & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Meerut, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), F.T.C. (Crime against Women), Meerut.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants submits that applicant no.1 is husband of opposite party no.2 and on some misconception, FIR was lodged by opposite party no.2. Thereafter parties entered into compromise and on that compromise, they approached this Hon'ble Court and filed Application 482 Cr.P.C. No.26113 of 2023 for quashing of the proceeding in terms of compromise. Hon'ble Court by order dated 02.09.2023 referred the matter to trial court for verification of the compromise and parties. Trial court vide order dated 04.08.2023 verified the parties and passed order in pursuance of the order of this Court. Counsel for the applicants submits that since parties have compromised the matter and both are living together, as stated in Para-15 of the affidavit. Counsel for the applicant next submits that both the parties have settled their dispute and there is no need to keep the proceeding pending. Now opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed further with the case. Copy of the compromise deed has been filed as Annexure -5 to the affidavit.

¶4Learned AGA and learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the fact.

¶5In 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.

¶6Thus 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.

¶7Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No.42479 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.61 of 2017 (State vs. Sharafat & others), under Sections 498-A, 504, 506, 323, 325 I.P.C & Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station-Mahila Thana, District-Meerut, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Junior Division), F.T.C. (Crime against Women), Meerut, is, hereby, quashed.

¶8This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 2.11.2023 SKD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad