Allowed

Jagdish Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Nov 2018A482/11822/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on a mutual compromise deed filed by the parties, relying on binding Supreme Court precedents that warrant quashing when disputes are amicably settled in eligible cases.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings in Criminal Case No.71 of 2013 along with charge sheet dated 17.1.2013 are hereby quashed.

Jagdish Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and Another — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 60

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11822 of 2013

¶3

Applicant :- Jagdish Kushwaha Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- V.K.S. Kushwaha Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard Sri V.K.S. Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Sri A.K. Malviya, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.

¶6

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings along with charge sheet dated 17.1.2013 in Criminal Case No.71 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.1121A of 2012, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1) X SC/ST Act, Police Station Birno, District Ghazipur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that Sri A.K. Malviya, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has filed application dated 10.09.2018 along with certified copy of the compromise deed dated 4.9.2018 and stated that both the parties have entered into compromise. Certified copy of the said compromise filed along with compromise affidavit is available on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant states that the matter has been compromised and the opposite party no. 2 does not want to pursue the matter any further as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, therefore, the present case is finally decided.

¶9

Sri A.K. Malviya, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has not disputed the said fact and submitted that the disputes have been amicably settled between the parties, therefore on the basis of compromise, the Hon'ble Court may kindly be quashed the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case.

¶10

In view of above, the applicant and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶11

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the judgement of the Apex Court reported in J.T. 2008 SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another) as well as Judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2012)10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. State of

¶12

Punjab) and reported in 2014 Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another) , the proceedings in Criminal Case No.71 of 2013 arising out of Case Crime No.1121A of 2012, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)X SC/ST Act, Police Station Birno, District Ghazipur is hereby quashed.

¶13

The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶14

Order Date :- 12.11.2018 Rmk.

Jagdish Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jagdish Kushwaha v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Anita Rani and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bheemsen and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashok Kushwaha and Others Vs State of U.P.

Shariq Ahmad Siddiqui and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Anr.