Court No. - 25 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33854 of 2009 Petitioner :- Param Jyoti Sen Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Amit Saxena Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Ashok Kumar Roopanwal,J.
Heard Mr. Amit Saxena, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for
the State and perused the record.
It has been argued by Mr. Saxena that the contents of the F.I.R., which were
investigated upon and the charge sheet was submitted against the applicant,
were the same on which O.P. No. 3 had filed a complaint. The complaint
ended in the discharge of the applicant on the basis of a compromise entered
into between the parties. This clearly shows that O.P. No. 3 was not at all
interested in pursuing those contents, which were the basis of the F.I.R. as
well as of the complaint. In such circumstances there would be no purpose to
continue with the proceedings as in that case also O.P. No. 3 cannot resile
from the compromise and would not give evidence against the applicant. In
such view of the matter, the trial would be a sheer wastage of the time and
therefore, the ends of justice requires that the proceedings of the present case
should be quashed.
Issue notice to respondent no. 3.
All the respondents may file counter affidavit within two weeks. Rejoinder
affidavit, if any, may be filed within one week thereafter.
List thereafter.
Till then the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 2824 of 2006, State Vs. Amar
Kumar and another, pending in the court of II A.C.J.M., Room No. 3,
Allahabad, shall remain stayed. The warrant, if issued against the applicant,
shall also remain styaed.
Order Date :- 2.2.2010
Pcl