Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:56943
Court No. - 82 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18175 of 2013
Applicant :- Madhuri Nigam
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Manu Khare,Anjeet Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.
1. Heard Sri Anjeet Singh, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Devendra Kumar Patel, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kamlesh Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.3 as well as learned AGA appearing on behalf of opposite party nos.1 and 2.
2. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the proceedings of Case no. 930 of 2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 718 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 218 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District Banda as well as Charge Sheet No. 4B of 2012 dated 01.05.2012 submitted in the above noted case under Sections 467, 468, 471, 218, 120B IPC pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that both the parties have entered into a compromise on dated 20.12.2023 which has already been preferred through compromise affidavit filed on dated 16.02.2024, this fact has also been endorsed and seconded by learned counsel for opposite party no.3.
4. The parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for opposite parties and has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error and would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.
5. A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties
1
is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.
6. In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692], Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider
"special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.
7. Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the entire proceedings of Case no. 930 of 2012, arising out of Case Crime No. 718 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 218 IPC, Police Station - Kotwali, District Banda as well as Charge Sheet No. 4B of 2012 dated 01.05.2012 submitted in the above noted case under Sections 467, 468, 471, 218, 120B IPC pending before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda, is hereby quashed.
8. Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed.
9. This order is being passed by this Court after hearing the contesting parties and perusing the affidavit filed by the opposite party no. 3. If at all, opposite party no. 3 feels that he has been duped or betrayed, then in that event, he may file recall application explaining the reasons for filing the said application.
10. The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.
Order Date :- 2.4.2024 Vivek Kr.
2