RAJPAL SINGH AND 2 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

         HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
                   APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4477 of 2023

Rajpal Singh And 2 Others
                                                            .....Applicant(s)
                                   Versus

State of U.P. and Another
                                                               .....Opposite
                                                                     Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s)               :    Lakshman Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)          :    G.A., Vijay Singh Sengar

Court No. - 75
                      HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

1. List revised.

2. Heard Sri Lakshman Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ajay
Singh Sengar, Advocate, holding brief of Sri Vijay Singh Sengar, learned
counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri V.D. Ojha, learned counsel for
the State and perused the records.

3. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the
applicants- Rajpal Singh, Smt. Santoshi Devi and Kumari Prabha Sengar,
with the prayer to quash charge sheet dated 31.12.2014 and entire
proceedings of Case No. 1082 of 2016, State vs. Rajpal Singh and others,
under Section 308 IPC Police Station Gohan, District Jalaun arising out of
Case Crime No. 620 of 2014, pending before the C.J.M., Orai, District
Jalaun on the basis of compromise. It is further prayed to stay the effect
and operation of the cognizance order dated 27.4.2016 and further
proceedings of the said case during pendency of this application.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the parties have settled
the dispute amicably out of court and on the basis of compromise the
applicants filed this application before this Court in which an order for
verification of the compromise was passed on 24.2.2023. It is argued that
in compliance of the order dated 24.2.2023 of this Court, the parties have
filed the order of this Court along with said compromise before the
concerned court for its verification after which the concerned court has
verified the said compromise vide its order dated 16.09.2023, copy of the
                                                                                             A482 No. 4477 of 2023
                                                                   2


                                    report of the concerned trial court to the said effect is on the record which
                                    states that the said compromise has been verified by it on 05.4.2023. It is
                                    argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter
                                    pending in the trial court and is not inclined to give any evidence against
                                    the applicants and therefore the impugned proceedings be quashed on the
                                    ground of compromise between the parties.

                                    5. Learned State counsel and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2
                                    could not dispute the fact that the matter has been amicably settled
                                    between the parties which was duly verified by the concerned trial court.

                                    6. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
                                    arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
                                    (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
                                    SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
                                    (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
                                    SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
                                    Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
                                    278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and
                                    others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that
                                    the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be
                                    quashed.

                                    7. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
                                    on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
                                    powers by this Court to quash the charge sheet and the proceedings as
                                    prayed for by the applicant(s).

                                    8. The present application is allowed.

                                    9. The impugned charge sheet and the proceedings of the said case are
                                    hereby quashed subject to the applicants and the opposite party no. 2 shall
                                    deposit Rs.20,000/- each before the concerned trial court which shall be
                                    utilized by the District Legal Services Authority of the district.



                                                                                               (Samit Gopal,J.)
                                    May 5, 2026
                                    Naresh




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