The High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. if a compromise is reached between parties, provided the case does not involve serious offences.

JUDGMENT

Shamim Ahmed, J.

Sri. Uday Bhanu Singh, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the opposite party no.2 by filing vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

2. Heard Shri. Anand Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for applicants, Shri. Uday Bhanu Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A., for the State as well as perused the record.

3. This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.36639 of 2018, Crime No.366 of 2017, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Talkatora, District Lucknow as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 31.03.2018 and summoning order dated 02.06.2018.

4. This Court on 21.05.2024 has passed the following order in Application Under Section 482 No.4620 of 2024:

"Shri. Uday Bhanu Singh, Advocate, has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No. 2 today in Court, which is taken on record.

Shri. Anand Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the applicants, after some arguments, submits that he is confining his prayer at this stage to the extent that a positive direction be given to the trial court that if applicants file compromise application before it, the same may be verified by the trial court at the earliest, as both the parties have entered into a compromise outside the court.

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 have no objection.

Accordingly, the present application is finally disposed of with a direction to the trial court that if any compromise application is filed by the applicants before it, the same may be verified without any further delay.

Certified copies annexed with this application be returned to the learned counsel for the applicants after keeping photostat of the same on the record. "

5. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in compliance of the order passed by this Court, the applicants filed compromise deed before the learned trial court and the concerned court vide its order dated 27.05.2024 verified the said compromise in the presence of the applicants and opposite party no.2, copy of which is annexed as Annexure No.11 to the affidavit filed in support of application.

6. Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 have submitted that since the parties have entered into compromise, which has also been verified by the trial court, therefore, no useful purpose would be served if the proceedings of the aforesaid case go on further.

7. Learned counsel for the parties have drawn the attention of this Court and placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in support of their case.

(i) B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana & Others 2003 (4) ACC 675.

(ii) Gian Ssingh v. State of Punjab 2012 (10) SCC 303.

(iii) Dimpey Gujral And Others v. Union Territory Through Administrator 2013 (11) SCC 697.

(iv) Narendra Singh And Others v. State of Punjab And Others 2014 (6) SCC 466.

(v) Yogendra Yadav And Others v. State of Jharkhand 2014 (9) SCC 653.

8. Summarizing the ratio of all the above cases the latest judgment pronounced by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors. v. State of Gujarat & Anr,; reported in (2017) 9 SCC 641 and in paragraph no.16, the Hon'ble Apex Court has summarized the broad principles with regard to exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in the case of compromise/settlement between the parties which emerges from precedent of the subjects as follows:-

i. "Section 482 preserves the inherent powers of the High Court to prevent an abuse of the process of any court or to secure the ends of justice. The provision does not confer new powers. It only recognizes and preserves powers which inhere in the High Court.

ii.The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to quash a First Information Report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender