Allowed

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

Allahabad HC22 Mar 2023A482/4581/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A single judge quashed criminal proceedings under sections 354C, 354D, 506, 509 IPC, and SC/ST Act based on a verified compromise between parties. The court barred future compensation payments and warned of action against the informant if they seek such payments.

What did the court decide?

Quashed proceedings of S.T. No. 49 of 2022; directed department not to pay compensation to informant; warned informant of action if attempting to take compensation.

Vivek Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4581 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Vivek Pal Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Prem Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Counter affidavit filed on behalf of State, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶6

Heard Avdhesh Narayan Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Prem Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party and Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

This application has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of S.T. No. 49 of 2022 (State Vs. Vivek Pal) arising out of Case Crime No. 39 of 2022, under sections 354C, 354D, 506, 509 IPC, Section 66E I.T. Act and Section 3(2)5A SC/ST Act related to Police Station Gohan, District Jalaun pending before the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Jalaun.

¶8

On 13.02.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶9

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that on account of some misconceptions and misgivings of the fact, present criminal case was instituted against the applicant, however subsequently, during pendency of the proceedings, with the intervention of respected members of the society, the parties have amicably settled their disputes and differences and a compromise deed dated 12.09.2022 was drawn between them, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 4 to this application.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in pursuance of the said compromise, this Court vide its order dated 04.12.2022 passed in Application U/s 482 No. 35742 of 2022 (Vivek Pal Vs. State of U.P. and Another), had directed the parties to appear before the court below and get

¶12

the said compromise verified.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that consequent to the said order, the parties appeared before the court below and in their presence, the court below has verified the said compromise and to this effect, a report dated 05.01.2023 has also been forwarded to this Court, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this application.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in view of the said compromise as well as report of the court below, entire proceedings initiated against the applicant be quashed.

¶15

Per contra, learned AGA has submitted that amount, if any, received by the opposite party no.2 as a compensation, should be recovered. He prays for and is granted a week's time to seek instruction regarding payment of compensation to opposite party no.2.

¶16

Put up as fresh on 28.02.2023.

¶17

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant in S.T. No. 49 of 2022 (State Vs. Vivek Pal), arising out of Case Crime No. 39 of 2022, under Sections 354-C, 354-D, 506, 509 IPC, Section 66-E of I.T. Act and Section 3(2)5A of SC/ST Act, Police Station Gohan, District Jalaun, pending in the court of Special Judge (SC/ST Act), Jalaun. "

¶18

In compliance of the aforesaid order a counter affidavit has been filed by learned AGA. In para 13 it has been stated that compensation has not been paid to the informant due to lack of money. Earlier in the order dated 13.02.2023 passed by this court, it has been mentioned that the parties appeared before the court below and in their presence, the court below has verified the said compromise and to this effect, a report dated 05.01.2023 has also been forwarded to this Court, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this application.

¶19

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶20

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party also accept that the parties have entered into a

¶21

compromise and he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶22

This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

¶23

B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,

¶24

Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677,

¶25

Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,

¶26

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,

¶27

Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

¶28

In the aforesaid judgments, the 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. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶29

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the

¶30

above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶31

Accordingly, the proceedings of S.T. No. 49 of 2022 (State Vs. Vivek Pal) arising out of Case Crime No. 39 of 2022, under sections 354C, 354D, 506, 509 IPC, Section 66E I.T. Act and Section 3(2)5A SC/ST Act related to Police Station Gohan, District Jalaun pending before the Special Judge (SC/ST) Act, Jalaun on the basis of compromise are hereby quashed.

¶32

The application is, accordingly, allowed . There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

As the parties have amicably settled their dispute the concerned department is directed not to pay any compensation amount to the informant.

¶34

Learned AGA shall inform about the aforesaid order to the department concerned from where compensation has to be paid.

¶35

In future if it is found that the informant in any manner tried to take compensation, appropriate action will be taken against him.

¶36

Order Date :- 22.3.2023 Arti

¶37

Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ashok Saroj and Another Vs State of U.P.and Another

Abushad @ Nanhu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Arif and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bhupendra and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Suresh Bajpai and Another Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Ram Chhail and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another