Arpan Singh @ Singhal v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 86 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 36048 of 2023 Applicant :- Arpan Singh @ Singhal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

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

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

¶3Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that opposite party no.2 is the wife of applicant and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicant, 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.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicant has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement agreement dated

09.08.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 5 to this application.

¶5Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that this Court vide its order dated 27.09.2023 had directed the parties to appear before the court below and to get the said settlement agreement verified.

¶6Pursuant to the said order dated 27.09.2023, the parties appeared before the court below and in their presence, the settlement agreement has been verified and a verification report/order dated 02.11.2023 has been passed, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure SA-1 to the Supplementary Affidavit.

¶7Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement drawn between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶8Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on her behalf and in para 3 of the said affidavit, the settlement agreement has been acknowledged. Further in para 4, it has been stated that opposite party no.2 does not want to contest the case.

¶9Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has next submitted, on instructions, that in view of the said settlement agreement, the opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶10Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶11This 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.

(vi). State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688.

¶12Wherein 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.

¶13Considering 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.

¶14Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 355 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 16 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Budaun, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-2nd, Budaun are hereby quashed.

¶15This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 7.12.2023 Nadim High Court of Judicature at Allahabad