Rahul and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. and Another

Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9075 of 2022 Applicant :- Rahul And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home, Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anumesh Mishra,Awadhesh Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Jai Pratap Singh Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record. Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicants for quashing the order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court Room No.12, Raebareli in Compliant Case No.1801442 of 2018, (Kanchan Verma vs. Rahul and others), Police Station-Sareni, District-Raebareli as also to quash the further proceeding in the aforesaid case under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibtion Act. On the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, this Court vide order dated 09.01.2023, has referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court, for amicable settlement between the parties. In compliance of earlier order of this Court dated 09.01.2023, the Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court alongwith settlement agreement dated 17.03.2023 has submitted its report, which has been annexed as 'Annexure-E', 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 409. Learned 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 further for quashing the order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court Room No.12, Raebareli in Compliant Case No.1801442 of 2018, (Kanchan Verma vs. Rahul and others), Police Station-Sareni, District-Raebareli as also to quash the further proceeding in the aforesaid case under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibtion Act. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the report dated 17.03.2023 submitted by Mediation and Conciliation Centre of this Court 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, the order dated 29.08.2022 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-II, Court Room No.12, Raebareli in Compliant Case No.1801442 of 2018, (Kanchan Verma vs. Rahul and others), Police Station-Sareni, District-Raebareli as also the further proceeding in the aforesaid case under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibtion Act, are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise. Accordingly, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. Order Date :- 21.11.2023/Raj High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench