Laxmikant Sahu and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37114 of 2023 Applicant :- Laxmikant Sahu And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahabir Yadav,Vijay Kumar Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Victor Henry Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1An 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 Victor Henry, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicant nos.1 and 2 are the parents-in-law and applicant no.3 is brother-in-law (Devar) of opposite party no.2 and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the family and the society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement agreement dated

14.08.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 6 to this application.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that as per the said settlement agreement, opposite party no.2 has restored her relationship with her husband and other in-laws and now, she has been living peacefully with them.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations relations between them, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶7Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on her behalf and in para 4 of the said affidavit, settlement agreement has been acknowledged and it has been stated that opposite party no.2 is living with her husband and she does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and she has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶8Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶9This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the cases of:-

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

(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation,

(2008) 9 SCC 677.

(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC

1.

(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303.

(v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab,

(2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶10Wherein 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, law expounded by Hon'ble 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 learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the present case.

¶12Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 40576 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 807 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Kalyanpur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Court No.2, Kanpur Nagar, are hereby quashed.

¶13This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 8.11.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad