Babalesh v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29784 of 2023 Applicant :- Babalesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Laxmi Narayan Rathour Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjeev Kumar Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U.P./opposite party No.1, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and perused the record. 2-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 11.04.2023 and proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1795 of 2022 (Smt. Meenu Devi vs. Babalesh) under Sections 452, 354 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Jalaun, District Jalaun pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai. 3-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 applicant are that the opposite party no. 2 lodged a complaint dated 09.05.2022 against the applicant-Babalesh, on which the learned Magistrate took cognizance and after recording the statement under Section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., summoned the applicant vide order dated 11.04.2023 to face trial under Sections 452, 354 and 506 I.P.C. It is next submitted that on

25.07.2023, the parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court and a compromise application dated 25.07.2023 has been filed before the concerned court below which has been verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai on

15.09.2023, pursuant to order of this Court dated

16.08.2023. The certified copy of compromise deed dated 15.09.2023 is annexed as Annexure No. 1 to the supplementary afÏdavit dated 09.10.2023. 4-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 applicant after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. 5-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 in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicant. 6-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 applicant 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. 7-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. 8-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. 9-In view of the above, quash the summoning order dated 11.04.2023 and proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1795 of 2022 (Smt. Meenu Devi vs. Babalesh) under Sections 452, 354 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Jalaun, District Jalaun against the applicant are hereby quashed. 10-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above. Order Date :- 6.11.2023 Saurabh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad High Court of Judicature at Allahabad