Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. moved for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 498-A IPC based on a settlement agreement. Court found compromise valid and quashed proceedings as no useful purpose would be served.
Proceedings before C.J.M., Chitrakoot in Case No. 04/84/2014 under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act are 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. - 17
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3281 of 2018
Applicant :- Suresh Kesharwani And 5 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ram Shanker Giri
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh-I,J.
This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 04/84/2014 pending in the court of C.J.M. Chitrakoot (State Vs. Suresh and others), arising out of charge sheet no. 126 of 2014 dated 10.9.2014 pertaining to Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Rajapur, District Chitrakoot on the ground that compromise has been entered into between the parties in Mediation Case No. 0334 of 2017 vide order dated 7.3.2017.
Counter affidavit has been filed from the side of opposite party nos. 2 and 3 through their learned counsel Sri Ram Shanker Giri, who is present. Learned counsel for the applicant Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh is also present.
In the said counter affidavit, it has been mentioned that proceedings of the aforementioned case no. 04/84/2014 pending in the court of C.J.M. Chitrakoot, under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Rajapur, District Chitrakoot may be quashed on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties in Mediation Case No. 334 of 2017 vide order dated 7.3.2017. It has also been mentioned that all the disputes have been settled between the parties amicably before the mediation centre and the decree of divorce has been passed on mutual consent.
Heard the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants Sri Pradeep Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party nos. 2 & 3 Sri Ram Shankar Giri, learned A.G.A and perused the record.
As annexure-5 to this application, the settlement agreement, which has been made between the parties, has been annexed and in Clause-d of this agreement, it is mentioned that it has also been agreed between the parties that all the cases, either civil or criminal, filed by them against each other will be withdrawn by moving suitable
application before court concerned within one month of the settlement agreement.
In pursuance of this compromise, the present application u/s 482 Cr.PC. is also being pressed with a prayer that the proceedings in Case No. 04/84/2014 pending before the C.J.M. Chitrakoot under the aforementioned Sections should be quashed because in view of law laid down in Gian Singh Vs. State of U.P., (2012), 10 SCC 303 , B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582 by the Supreme Court, if the parties are entering into a compromise, and it appears to the court that no useful purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings continued as there would hardly be any possibility of the accused being convicted, the proceedings may be quashed. Therefore, in the interest of justice, the proceedings may be quashed in a criminal case, even if that case is a non-compoundable one.
In view of above position of law and looking to the fact that both the parties have entered into a compromise, which is evident from the settlement agreement entered into between the parties before Allahabad Mediation Centre on 7.3.2017, it is proper that proceedings in the present case be quashed, as no useful purpose would be served in allowing the proceedings to continue, as in view of said compromise, there is no chance of accused being convicted.
Accordingly, Proceedings before the court of C.J.M., Chitrakoot in Case No. 04/84/2014 arising out of Charge Sheet No. 126 of 2014 dated 10.9.2014, under Section 498-A IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Rajapur, District Chitrakoot are quashed.
Order Date :- 15.3.2018 A.P. Pandey
2 issues framed by the court
Whether proceedings under Section 498-A IPC can be quashed in view of a compromise entered into between the parties.
Whether Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be invoked to quash proceedings even in a non-compoundable offence upon settlement.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh Vs. State of U.P.Relied on¶11
Gian Singh Vs. State of U.P., (2012), 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of HaryanaRelied on¶11
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of PunjabRelied on¶11
Madan Mohan Abbot Vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582 · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Suresh Kesharwani And 5 Ors.
Dinesh Kumar Singh
A.P. Pandey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
