Arif v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39003 of 2023 Applicant :- Arif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vachaspati Panday Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Brijesh Kumar Pandey Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

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

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Shri B.K. Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶3This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet No. 053 of 2015 dated 20.6.2015 and cognizance order dated

3.7.2015 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 0813 of 2015 (State vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No. 0119 of 2015, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, P.S.Khajuria, District-Rampur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that 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 applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to a settlement-agreement dated 18.9.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexue No. 4 to this application.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that except framing of charge no further progress has been made in the trial.

¶7Learned counsel for the applicant 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 applicant.

¶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 said affidavit, the said compromise has been acknowledged. Further, in paragraph-6 of the affidavit, it has been stated that the opposite party No. 2 has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed against the applicant.

¶9Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of :-

¶1B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675.

¶2Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677].

¶3Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.

¶4Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶5Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466. Wherein the 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.

¶11Considering 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.

¶12Accordingly, the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 0813 of 2015 (State vs. Arif) arising out of Case Crime No. 0119 of 2015, under Sections 379, 411 IPC, P.S.Khajuria, District-Rampur, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rampur, are hereby quashed.

¶13This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 7.11.2023 KU High Court of Judicature at Allahabad