Court No. - 64

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7047 of 2022

Applicant :- Tauheed

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Vimal Kumar

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sarvesh Kumar Dubey

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for

the State and, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

2. On 19.7.2022, below quoted order was passed:

"Heard Sri Vimal Kumar, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Varun Kumar Agnihotri,

learned Brief Holder, for the State and perused the record of the case.

The instant application has been moved by applicant for quashing the entire

proceeding of Case No.725 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime 845 of 2019,

under Sections 420 and 406 IPC, Police Station Chhibramau, District Kannauj

pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chhibramau, District

Kannauj as well as charge sheet dated 6.5.2020.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the present dispute is purely

civil in nature and even if allegations made in the FIR are accepted then also it

does not attract any criminal liability and at best the present matter is a matter of

breach of agreement. He further submitted that the alleged money of Rs.Five

Lacs which was taken by applicant from opposite party no.2 has also been

returned back to him on different dates. This fact is evident from the statement of

bank account of the wife of applicant which is annexed as Annexure-7 to the

affidavit filed in support of the present application, therefore, the charge sheet

filed against applicant is bad.

Per contra, learned AGA submitted that perusal of the FIR and the statement

recorded during investigation prima facie discloses cognizable offence under

Sections 420 and 406 IPC against applicant but the learned AGA could not

dispute the fact that the alleged audio clip could not be recovered during the

course of investigation and further statement of account of the wife of applicant

shows that the entire money of Rs.Five Lacs has already been returned back by

applicant on different dates and further the present dispute appears to be a

dispute of breach of agreement.

Matter requires consideration.

Issue notice to opposite party no.2 returnable at an early date.

Steps be taken within a week.

The opposite party no.2 may file counter affidavit within three weeks. Rejoinder

affidavit, if any, may be filed within two weeks thereafter.

List on 25.8.2022.

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant

in the aforesaid case."

3. Today, joint affidavit has been filed by parties. Taken on

record. Thus, it has been indicated, there existed only civil

dispute between the parties with respect to money transaction.

That has been resolved amicably between the parties. Learned

counsel for the applicant states, the opposite party no.2 does not

claim any further money and it has been further stated, no real

occurrence had taken place and that the present prosecution

came to be levelled owing to other misunderstanding and

misgiving.

4. In Application U/S 482 No. 17467 of 2022 (Dharamveer

And 5 Others Vs. State of U.P. and Another), decided on

02.01.2023, it has been observed as under:

"6. From a perusal of the record, it appears, the real dispute between the parties were

civil and private in nature and criminal prosecution arose incidentally and not as a

natural consequence of the real occurrence. It is further apparent that the parties have

entered into a compromise and they further appear to have settled their aforesaid real

disputes amicably. The opposite party no. 2, who would be a key prosecution witness, if

the trial were to proceed, has declared his unequivocal intent to turn hostile at the trial.

In such circumstances, it is apparent that merits and truth apart, the proceedings in trial,

if allowed to continue, may largely be a waste of precious time by the learned court

below.

7. The court ca