Sufiyan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

Sufiyan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Petition allowed; chargesheet dated 30.05.2020, summoning order dated 20.11.2020 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 48038 of 2020 (State Vs. Sufiyan and others) quashed on the basis of the verified compromise; no order as to costs.

Issue for consideration

Whether the chargesheet dated 30.05.2020, summoning order dated 20.11.2020 and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 48038 of 2020 (arising out of Case Crime No. 684 of 2019) can be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties, notwithstanding that the offences include non-compoundable offences under section 320 Cr.P.C.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances and the dictums of the Hon'ble Apex Court (including the principle that even non-compoundable offences may be compounded by a Constitutional Court on the basis of compromise), the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 48038 of 2020 (State Vs. Sufiyan and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 684 of 2019, are quashed on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties, whose genuineness and free-will were verified by the court below vide report dated 06.01.2024.

Ratio / Principle

Even if the offences in question are not compoundable within the scope of section 320 Cr.P.C., considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to compound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties (per Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs. State of Kerala, adopted as the basis of this decision).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing of chargesheet and summoning order on the basis of compromise — Application under S.482 Cr.P.C. allowed — Offences under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Marriage Protection Act (P.S. Gudamba, District Lucknow) — Parties entered into a compromise deed; pursuant to earlier order dated 22.12.2023 in Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 12649 of 2023, the court below vide report dated 06.01.2024 verified the parties and contents of the compromise deed as genuine and the compromise as by free-will — Following Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan v. State of Kerala (2018) 15 SCC 343 and other Apex Court dictums (B.S. Joshi; Gian Singh; Shambhu Kewat; Deepak; Manish; J.Ramesh Kamath; Rajveer Singh; Parbatbhai AAhir), even offences not compoundable within the scope of section 320 Cr.P.C. may be compounded by the Constitutional Court on the basis of compromise — Entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 48038 of 2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 684 of 2019 quashed; petition allowed, no order as to costs.

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:13283

Court No. - 11

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1344 of 2024

Applicant :- Sufiyan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Govt. Lucknow And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bhola Singh Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.

Heard Sri Shubham Yadav holding brief of Sri Bhola Singh Patel, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri Ram Raj Singh, learned AGA for the State as well as Sri Pravin Kumar Verma, Advocate, who has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2. His Vakalatnama is taken on record.

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioners with the prayer to quash the chargesheet dated 30.05.2020 alongwith entire proceedings and summoning order dated 20.11.2020, on the basis of compromise, in Criminal Case No. 48038 of 2020 (State Vs. Sufiyan and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 684 of 2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 3/4 of Muslim Marriage Protection Act, Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow, pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that earlier the petitioners approached this Court by means of Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 12649 of 2023, wherein this Court vide order dated 22.12.2023 directed the parties to file compromise deed before the concerned court below and the court below was directed to verify the contents and parties of the compromise deed.

In compliance of the aforesaid order, the compromise deed was filed before the court below and the court concerned vide report dated 06.01.2024 has verified the contents and parties of the compromise deed and submitted his report to the extent that the parties and contents of the compromise deed are genuine and they have entered into the compromise by free-will. The report of the concerned court below dated 06.01.2024 is on record.

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has also submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal case.

The Apex Court in re: Unnikrishnan alias Unnikuttan vs. State of Kerala reported in (2018) 15 Supreme Court Cases 343 has observed that even if the offence(s) in question is/are not compoundable within the scope of section 320 Cr.P.C. even then considering the facts and circumstances of the case in question the Constitutional Court may allow the parties to compound such offence(s) on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Not only the above, considering the facts and circumstances of the issue in question and other dictums of Hon'ble Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471; Parbatbhai AAhir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed .

The present petition is, therefore, allowed .

No order as to costs.

[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]

Order Date :- 13.2.2024 kkv/

Digitally signed by :- KRISHAN KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench