Jahageer v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10918 of 2023 Applicant :- Jahageer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Kumar Singh,Sujata Choudhary Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Tyagi Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶1Heard Shri Mohit Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Parvesh Kumar, Advocate holding brief of Shri Pankaj Kumar Tyagi, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶2This application under Section 482 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 416 of 2019, State Vs. Batooli and others, Case Crime No. 136 of 2017, Under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, P.S. Jansath, District Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, IInd, Muzaffar Nagar and also quash the N.B.W. order dated 14.10.2019.

¶3The case was heard on 07.04.2023 and the Court has passed the following order:- "Vakaltnama has been filed on behalf of the opposite party no.2 in the Court today is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State. This application under Section 482 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 416 of 2019, State Vs. Batooli and others, Case Crime No. 136 of 2017, Under Sections 420, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, P.S. Jansath, District Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, IInd, Muzaffar Nagar and also quash the N.B.W. order dated

14.10.2019. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant and opposite party no.2 have settled their disputes amicably and arrived at a compromise. The compromise deed has been filed before the court below and a copy of the same has also been enclosed as Annexure-1 of short counter affidavit. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303. Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants. Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it. Put up this case on 04.05.2023 before the appropriate Bench. Learned counsel for the parties undertake that they shall make a fresh compromise deed along with an application before the court below within two weeks from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. They further undertake to ensure their presence before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 20.04.2023 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court. Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours. Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within two weeks from today. Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. "

¶4Pursuant to order dated 07.04.2023, compromise has been verified by the trial Court vide order dated 26.04.2023 and the same has been received to this Court from Judicial Magistrate, Court No.2, Muzaffar Nagar, vide letter dated 17.05.2023.

¶5Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has not objected the aforesaid facts and submitted that in case proceedings against the applicant is quashed, he would have no objection.

¶6In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶7Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶8The present application is, accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 23.11.2023 Amit/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad