Rakesh Pal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Court No. - 11 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1429 of 2019 Applicant :- Rakesh Pal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Kumar Mishra,Mohammad Afsar Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Mohd. Nafees Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record. Instant application has been filed for the following main relief:- "For the facts reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying petition supported by an affidavit it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned Charge sheet No.255/2010 dated 21-07-2010 filed by the Police in initial Criminal Case No.2678 of 2010 arising from Case crime No.298/2010, U/S 498-A,323,504,506 IPC registered at P.S.Aliganj District-Lucknow and further the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2678 of 2010 [State Vs. Rakesh Pal & another] arising from Case crime No.298/2010, U/S 498-A,323,504,506 IPC registered at P.S.Aliganj District-Lucknow initiated against the petitioners the petitioner pending before the learned Special CJM- (Customs) Lucknow may also be quashed on the basis of compromise dated 16-02-2019 entered into between the petitioners and O.P.No.2." Considering the facts of the case and the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated 25.02.2019 referred the matter to the Senior Registrar of this Court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. In compliance of order of this Court dated 25.02.2019, the Senior Registrar of this Court has submitted his report dated

07.03.2019 regarding verification of compromise, which is on record, mentioning therein 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. 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 party no. 2 does not want to proceed with the proceedings, in issue. Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the order of 07.03.2019 as also taking note of the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above and the nature of dispute/crime, which is essentially a matrimonial dispute, this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending before the trial court and hence, the same are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise. Accordingly, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. Order Date :- 22.11.2023 Vinay/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench