Dipendra and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 88 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24385 of 2023 Applicant :- Dipendra And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J. 1-Heard Mr. Pankaj Dwivedi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1, Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 2-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 136 of 2014 (Shashikant vs. Dipendra and others), under Section 394 I.P.C., P.S. Malpura, District Agra pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 13, District Agra on the ground of settlement agreement dated 28.09.2021 and 15.05.2023 between the parties concerned. 3-It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that the opposite party no. 2 filed a complaint on 14.07.2014 against the applicants, on which they have been summoned vide order dated

22.11.2014 to face trial under Section 394 I.P.C. Thereafter, the parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the court and filed a compromise application dated 15.05.2023 before the concerned court below, which was directed to be verified vide order dated 02.05.2023 of this Court passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 482 Cr.P.C. No. 28612 of 2017. Pursuant to the said order, the compromise between the parties concerned has been verified vide order dated 27.05.2023, which has been brought on record as Annexure No. 5 to this application. 4-On the strength of aforesaid facts, it is submitted that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned complaint against the applicants after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court. 5-Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No. 2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants. 6-After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing a criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost. 7-The Apex Court in case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Laxmi Narayan and others AIR 2019 SC 1296 and Ramgopal and another vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh 2021 Supreme (SC) 529 after wholesome treatment has laid down guidelines for quashing of criminal proceedings arising out of non-compoundable offences under Section 320 Cr.P.C. on the basis of compromise, wherein quashing of proceeding of criminal cases which involved non compoundable offences has been approved by the Apex Court if the nature of the offence is private in nature and does not have a serious impact on society. 8-Considering the facts and circumstances of this case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court as mentioned above, I find that the case in hand does not have grave and wider social ramifications and the dispute is more or less confined between the litigating parties, therefore this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end. 9-In view of the above, the criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 136 of 2014 (Shashikant vs. Dipendra and others) against the applicants are hereby quashed. 10-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above. Order Date :- 20.11.2023 Saurabh High Court of Judicature at Allahabad