Arpit Goyal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36205 of 2023 Applicant :- Arpit Goyal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anand Kumar Singh 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 Anand Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicant no.1 is the husband and applicant nos.2 and 3 are the parents-in-law 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 compromise application dated

11.04.2023 made between the parties, supported by an affidavit, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 4 to this application.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that as per the said compromise, the applicant no.1 has already paid a sum of Rs.22,00,000/- to opposite party no.2 in lieu of all her claims and dues and now, nothing remains to be paid.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise made 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 5 of the said affidavit, said compromise has been acknowledged and the factum of receiving of Rs.22,00,000/- by opposite party no.2 as permanent alimony has also been acknowledged. Further in para 6, it has been stated that in view of the said compromise, opposite party no.2 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. 36021 of 2022 (State Vs. Arpit Goyal and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 201 of 2021, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/ Fast Track Court-I, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

¶13This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 9.11.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad