AJAY BHAL Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Counter affidavit and power has been filed by Sri Salil Kumar Srivastava, Advocate today be taken on record. Heard Sri Anil Kumar Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Rajendra Kumar Dwivedi, learned AGA for the opposite parties no.1 and 2 and Sri Salil Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel appearing for the complainant/opposite party no.3 and perused the record.

(2.) It has been argued by the counsel for the petitioner that the parties have entered into a compromise by way of settlement arrived at between the parties and a compromise deed has also been executed on 2.2.2009 whereby all the disputes between the parties to that agreement have been settled outside the court even by stipulating arbitration clause in case of any future dispute. In the counter affidavit filed by the opposite party no.3 Smt.Chandra Dixit it has been averred that the opposite party no.3 has arrived at a settlement/compromise on 2.2.2009 and accordingly all the criminal and civil cases have been sought to be withdrawn and she is neither willing to proceed with criminal prosecution instituted by her nor she is willing to lead any evidence in support of the criminal prosecution launched by her.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed before this Court an order passed by another bench of this Court in criminal misc.case no.4954 of 2009 on 4.1.2010 which has been annexed as Annexure-20 to the petition whereby the criminal proceedings between the same parties have been quashed in view of the compromise between the parties, although the offences in the said proceedings were non compoundable.