Veerpal Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113591

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27838 of 2024

Applicant :- Veerpal Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- Mahesh Kumar Kuntal,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet no.75 of 2016 dated 18.12.2016, cognizance order dated 12.01.2017 passed by the Session Judge, Jhansi as well as entire proceedings of Case No.83 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.130 of 2016, under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sakrar, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Session Judge, Jhansi & F.T.C.II, Jhansi.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the both the parties engaged in assaulting each other and lodged FIR against each other. Both the parties have received injury. It is next submitted that the applicants filed 482 Application before this Court to quash the proceedings as both the parties have amicably settled the dispute out of the court and this Court vide order dated 19.12.2024 has passed the following orders:-

¶9

"Sri Jainendra Kumar Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mahesh Kumar Kuntal has filed Vakalatnama along-with short counter affidavit on behalf of the opposite party no. 2, which is taken on record.

¶10

Learned counsel for both the parties submitted that parties settled their dispute arising out of offence punishable under Sections 323, 325, 504, 506 of I.P.C. on the basis of compromise dated 11.07.2024 which is annexed at page no. 52 and 53 of the paper book.

¶11

Office is directed to send original compromise to court concerned for verification immediately after retaining a photocopy of the same.

¶12

Both the parties are directed to appear before the court concerned within three weeks from today for verification, the court concerned is directed to verify the same.

¶13

Applicants are directed to file supplementary affidavit annexing certified copy of the compromise as well as verification proceedings of compromise.

¶14

Put up this case as fresh on 7.5.2025.

¶15

Till the next date of listing proceedings of Case No. 83 of 2017 (State Vs. Niraj and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 130 of 2016, under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police StationSarkar, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Session Judge/F.T.C.-IInd, Jhansi shall remain stayed against the applicants."

¶16

Pursuant to the said order dated 19.12.2024, the parties appeared before the court below and in their presence, after due verification of the parties through their counsels and contents of the compromise made between them, the court vide order dated 21.01.2025 has passed the verification order. A copy of the same is available with the record.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their private and civil dispute through compromise and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶18

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed a short counter affidavit and specifically stated in Para 3 that parties have entered into compromise and settled their dispute and opposite party no.2 and applicants are agreed to withdraw their case launched against each other. In para-4 of the short counter affidavit it has been stated that due to some confusion, the present case was launched against the applicants and now the parties are ready to settle their disputes on the basis of compromise.

¶19

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants and opposite party no.2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶20

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of Case No.83 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.130 of 2016, under Sections 325, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Sakrar, District Jhansi, pending in the Court of Session Judge, Jhansi & F.T.C.II, Jhansi is hereby quashed.

¶21

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C is accordingly allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 15.7.2025 SKD

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Veerpal Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerpal Singh and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amit Chaudhary and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Satendra Pratap vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Naresh @ Nabi vs State of U.P. and Another

Gausul Bara vs State of Up and Another

Javed Ali and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Anwar Malik and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another