Crm. App. under Section 482 Cr.P.C. filed for quashing criminal proceedings following a matrimonial compromise and settlement. The Court held that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further and quashed the entire case pending between the same parties.
Proceedings of Complaint Case No. 729 of 2016 are hereby quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 26
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32418 of 2016
Applicant :- Ajay Prakash @ Chunne And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudarshan Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,Ju.
Sri Dharmendra Kumar Shukla has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of applicants after obtaining no objection by earlier counsel Sri Sudarshan Singh today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA and Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Complaint Case No.729 of 2016 (Girish Chandra Mishra Vs. Ajay Prakash and others) under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC, Police Station Tilhar, District Shahjahanpur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (J.D.) Tilhar, Shahjahanpur.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the present matter relates to matrimonial dispute and compromise has been entered into between the applicants and the opposite party no. 2. He further submitted that 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. It is further stated that vide order dated 15.11.2018 passed in Application U/S 482 No.392 of 2017, this Court has quashed the proceeding on the basis of compromise, which was pending between the same parties.
Sri Rajesh Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 has filed affidavit and supported the case of the applicants. In paragraphs 4 and 5 of the affidavit, it is clearly mentioned that disputes have been settled between the parties, therefore on the basis of compromise the Hon'ble Court may kindly be quash the entire proceeding of the aforesaid case. Along with affidavit, compromise deed dated 6.9.2018 has also been annexed as Annexure No. 1 to said the affidavit.
In view of above, the applicants 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.
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 Bureau 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 ), the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present application is, accordingly, allowed.
Order Date :- 16.11.2018 Junaid
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506, 406 IPC should be quashed on account of compromise and settlement between the parties.
Whether a quashing order passed in a prior application between the same parties precludes the institution of fresh proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi Vs. State of HaryanaExplained¶12
2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana · Who else cites this
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and anotherExplained¶12
J.T. 2008(() SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another) · Who else cites this
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabExplained¶12
(2012)10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab) · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and anotherExplained¶12
reported in 2014 Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another)
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ajay Prakash @ Chunne And 3 Others
State Of U.P.
Opposite Party No. 2
Neeraj Tiwari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
