Prem v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3234 of 2013 Applicant :- Prem Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajesh Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Ashok Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶1Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Shri Ashok Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶2This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash entire proceedings of Case No. 1702 of 2010, arising out of Case Crime No.235 of 2008, under Sections 420, 421, 468, 471, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-IV, Moradabad.

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on account of property dispute between the parties, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicant, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of the family and society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of this Court to the compromise application dated 27.04.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure-SA1 to this application.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in view of the said compromise and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between the parties, entire proceedings against the applicant be quashed.

¶6Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has submitted that he has filed a joint affidavit before this Court and in paragraph 3 of the said affidavit, the said compromise has been acknowledged. In paragraph 5 of the said affidavit, it is further stated that opposite party no.2 has no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶7Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶8This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, ( 2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat

(2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab

(2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein 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 the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶9Considering 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 above mentioned case.

¶10Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 1702 of 2010, arising out of Case Crime No.235 of 2008, under Sections 420, 421, 468, 471, 323, 504 and 506 IPC, Police Station Majhola, District Moradabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-IV, Moradabada, are hereby quashed.

¶11This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 17.11.2023 Subham High Court of Judicature at Allahabad