RAM PRASAD Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) VIJAY Kumar Verma, J. By means of this application under section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure (in short the 'cr. P. C. '), the applicants Ram Prasad, Shri Dev, Jai Dev and Atma Darshi have invoked the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, praying for quashing of the proceedings of Case No. 1547 of 2007 (State vs. Ram Prasad and others), pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate Gorakhpur.

(2.) SHORN of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the application under section 482 Cr. P. C. , in brief, are that opposite party No. 2 Jeetan had moved an application under section 156 (3) Cr. P. C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II Gorakhpur. On the basis of the order passed on that application, an FIR was lodged on 13. 06. 2007 at P. S. Jhagaha, where a case under sections 323, 504, 506, 394 IPC and 3 (i) (X) SC/st Act was registered at Crime No. 376 of 2007 (C) against the applicants Ram Prasad, Shri Dev, Jai Dev and Atma Darshi. After investigation charge-sheet under section 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3 (i) (X) SC/st Act has been submitted against the applicants, on the basis of which Criminal Case No. 1547 of 2007 has been registered. Now the applicants-accused have come to this court for quashing the proceedings of aforesaid case.

(3.) THE matter was referred for reconciliation to Allahabad High Court Mediation Centre. THE parties settled their dispute on 06. 04. 2008. Settlement agreement is on record, which shows that the dispute with regard to Crl. Misc. Application No. 1813 of 2008 (instant case) has been amicably settled by the parties through the process of conciliation/mediation. Since the dispute of personal nature has been settled by the complainant and the applicants due to intervention of Allahabad High Court Mediation Centre, hence no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings of Crl. Case No. 1542 of 2007. THErefore, having regard to the observations made in cases of B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana and Ausaf Ahmad Abbasi vs. State of U. P. (supra), the proceedings of the criminal case referred to above may be quashed by this Court on its inherent jurisdiction. In the case of Ruchi Agarwal vs. Amit Kumar Agrawal and others 2005 (51) ACC 21, the Hon'ble Apex Court quashed the proceedings of the criminal case due to the compromise entered into between the parties. Following this case, this court in the case of Shikha Singh and others vs. State of U. P. and another 2007 (59) ACC 123. quashed the proceedings of criminal case due to the compromise entered into between the parties. Similarly in the case of Dinesh Kumar Jain and others vs. State of U. P. and Others 2007 (59) ACC 148, this court has quashed the proceedings of the criminal case under section 498a, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D. P. Act due to the compromise entered into between the parties in the proceedings under section 125 Cr. P. C. Reliance in this case has been placed on B. S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana (supra ). In the case of Ganga Charan Rajpoot vs. State of U. P. and others 2007 (57) ACC 981, the proceedings of criminal case was quashed by this Court due to the compromise entered into between the parties outside the court.