Surjeet Singh Saini and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35984 of 2023 Applicant :- Surjeet Singh Saini And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vikash Chandra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Shri Anjit Kumar Verma, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama along with short counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court, which is taken on record.

¶3Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Anjit Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant no.1 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.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to the compromise application dated

10.03.2023, supported by an affidavit, made between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 4 to this application.

¶6Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that pursuant to the said compromise, the parties have restored their relationship and have agreed to live together as husband and wife.

¶7Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said compromise as well as the fact that parties have restored their relationship and are living together as husband and wife, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶8Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 and in para 2 of the said affidavit, the said compromise has been acknowledged. It has further been stated that parties have restored their relationship and are now living together as husband and wife. Further in para 3, it has been stated that 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.

¶9Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶10This 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.

¶11Wherein 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.

¶12Considering 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.

¶13Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 5811 of 2022 (State Vs. Surjeet Singh Saini and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 638 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Loni, District Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

¶14This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 16.11.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad