Pranjal Saini and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 87 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 42925 of 2023 Applicant :- Pranjal Saini And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶1Sri Akhil Srivastava, Advocate, put in appearance on behalf of opposite party No. 2 has filed vakalatnama alongwith short counter affidavit, which is taken on record.

¶2Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Akhil Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 2.

¶3The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the the entire proceeding of Case No. 8093 of 2021(State Vs. Pranjal Saini & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 684 of 2020, under Sections-498A, 420, 504, 506 I.P.C. & 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station-Sikandra, District:-Agra on the basis of compromise dated

01.11.2023.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that present case is arising out of matrimonial dispute. He next submitted that now parties have entered into compromise dated 01.11.20233 and the same has also been filed before the trial Court. He next submitted that out of compromise entered between the parties, they have decided to live separately. He next submitted that this fact has also not been disputed int the short counter affidavit filed by opposite party No. 2. He next submitted that in light of compromise entered between the parties, criminal proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶5Learned A.G.A. could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶6Sri Akhil Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party Nos. 2 has filed short counter affidavit, in which he has supported the case of the applicants and submitted that in case proceedings against the applicants is quashed, he would have no objection.

¶7In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants and opposite party Nos. 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.

¶8Thus 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.

¶9The present application is, accordingly allowed.

¶10No order as to costs. Order Date :- 6.12.2023 ADY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad