Pankaj and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100928

Court No. - 68

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6274 of 2023

Applicant :- Pankaj And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Adarsh Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Pawan Singh Pundir, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Adarsh Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

On 22.03.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard Sri Pawan Singh Pundir, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Adarsh Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶9

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the proceedings of Case No. 333/9 of 2021 (State Vs. Pankaj Kumar and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 72 of 2019, under sections 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Garipukhta, District Shamli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Kairana, District Shamli on the basis of compromise.

¶10

It is submitted that the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing on 09.02.2023 annexed as Annexure-3 to the affidavit filed in support of this application.

¶11

Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a copy of this order within two weeks from today and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a short date for verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order within a period of three weeks thereafter and send a report to this Court.

¶12

Place this case in the additional cause list on 10.05.2023 before the appropriate Bench."

¶13

In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise verification report is kept on record as is evident from office report dated

¶14

09.05.2023. A letter of Civil Judge (S.D.)/A.C.J.M., Kairana dated 04.04.2023 has been placed along with compromise deed as well as order dated 04.04.2023 vide which compromise has been verified in presence of the parties along with their respective counsels.

¶15

Learned counsel for the parties submit that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the Court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed by this Court.

¶16

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, they have no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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.

¶24

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) in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶25

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

¶26

their dispute.

¶27

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 333/9 of 2021 (State Vs. Pankaj Kumar and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 72 of 2019, under sections 406, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Garipukhta, District Shamli, pending in the Court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.) Kairana, District Shamli, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed .

¶28

The application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶29

Order Date :- 10.5.2023 Rahul.

¶30

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Pankaj and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Neeraj Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Ashok Kumar Kureel Vs State of U.P and 7 Others

Raja Sahab Bhadauriya Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Gautam Khera and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Diwakar Arya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another