Allowed

Dilip Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2018A482/26924/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 406 and 506 IPC arising from a cheque-related case. The court observed that the matter was amicably settled between the parties and no useful purpose would be served by proceeding further.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings in Case No. 422 of 2016 arising from Crime No. 1066 of 2015 under Sections 406, 506 IPC are quashed.

Dilip Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 26

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26924 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vijay Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

¶6

The present revision has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings initiated in pursuance of the charge sheet No. 01/2016 dated 24.12.2015 and the cognizance order dated 23.02.2016 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar in Case No. 422 of 2016 (State Vs. Dilip Kumar Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 1066 of 2015, under Sections 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sant Kabir Nagar.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that now 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 may be finally decided.

¶8

Sri Vijay Prakash Pandey, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has filed a short counter. He has supported the fact of the applicant. He submitted that he has already filed compromise application before the Presiding Officer, Additional Court No. 4, Lucknow and on the basis of compromise application dated 13.7.2018, the proceeding initiated by the applicant under Section 138 N.I. Act has been quashed and the accused of the case has been discharged. In paragraph 5 of the compromise application dated 13.7.2018, it has been stated that in the proceeding pending in the High Court, the parties shall file compromise and on the basis of that, present proceeding may be quashed. He 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.

¶9

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.

¶10

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC

¶11

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 Punjab) and reported in 2014 Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another) , proceedings in in Case No. 422 of 2016 (State Vs. Dilip Kumar Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 1066 of 2015, under Sections 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Khalilabad, District Sant Kabir Nagar, is hereby quashed.

¶12

The present application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶13

Order Date :- 22.11.2018 Rmk.

Dilip Kumar Singh v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dilip Kumar Singh 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Veer Singh Vs State of U.P.

Pawan Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pawan Jain Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Vs State of U.P.

Ram Akshaibar Singh and Others Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Vimla Dixit and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another