Khalid Beg and 10 Others v. State of U.P Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and 14 Others

Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11363 of 2023 Applicant :- Khalid Beg And 10 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Secy. Deptt. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. And 14 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Vinod Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Sri Sreeskumar Srivastava, learned Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 to 15 and filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Heard Sri Vinod Kumar, learned Counsel for the applicants, Sri Sreeskumar Srivastava, learned counsel for opposite party nos. 2 to 15 and learned learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. The present petition has been filed for the following main relief:- "Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to pass an order thereby allowing the petition and quash the entire proceedings of case bearing Case No.945/2018, Case Crime No.226/2015, Under Section 147,308,323,504,506,120-B I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Tambaur, District Sitapur "State Verses Jhabban Beg and others" pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Sitapur on the basis of compromise between the parties concern in the light of several law laid down by this Hon'ble Court as well as Hon'ble Apex Court." On the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide order dated 07.02.2023 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 1149 of 2023, has referred the matter to the court below for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. In compliance of earlier order of this Court dated 07.02.2023, the Civil Judge (Junior Division)/FTC/CAW/Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur has verified the compromise on 16.08.2023, as appears from the Annexure No. 6, wherein it has been mentioned that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels before the court. With regard to the prayer sought including quashing of criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise, the learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Romgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 (1) SCJ 536, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others

(2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC

¶409Learned Additional Government Advocate could not dispute the fact that the compromise has been entered into between the parties and now the opposite parties do not want to proceed with Case No.945/2018, Case Crime No.226/2015, Under Section 147,308,323,504,506,120-B I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Tambaur, District Sitapur, which is pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Sitapur. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the report dated 16.08.2023 as also taking note of the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments referred above, this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending before the trial court and hence, entire proceedings of Case No.945/2018, Case Crime No.226/2015, Under Section 147,308,323,504,506,120-B I.P.C. & Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station-Tambaur, District Sitapur (State Verses Jhabban Beg and others), are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise. Accordingly, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. Order Date :- 20.11.2023 Jyoti/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench