Allowed

joni and 2 others v. state of up and another

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2018A482/6448/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 363 and 366 of the IPC pending before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, after finding that the applicant and the victim have settled their dispute amicably and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The criminal proceedings in Case No.1174 of 2013 under Sections 363 and 366 IPC were quashed.

joni and 2 others Vs state of up and another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 52

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6448 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Joni And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Jee Saxena,Raghuvansh Chandra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Raghuvansh Chandra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rampyare Lal Srivastava, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 who has filed Vakalatnama along with affidavit which is taken on record, learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing proceeding in Case No.1174 of 2013 (State Vs. Joni and others) under Sections 363 and 366 I.P.C., pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.IX, Meerut.

¶7

Learned counsel for the parties have stated that opposite party no.2 has lodged F.I.R. with the allegation that applicant no.1 had kidnapped his minor daughter. Charge sheet was submitted long back. It is further contended that daughter of opposite party no.2 and applicant are leading happy marital life and out of their wedlock four children have also born. In this behalf, affidavit of opposite party no.2 and the prosecutrix has been filed along with counter affidavit in which it is stated that the deponent of the counter affidavit has no objection, if the present proceedings are quashed and no useful purpose would be served, if the proceedings in the present case are allowed to continue.

¶8

Learned counsel opposite party no.2 has stated that opposite party no.2 is satisfied that his daughter is living happily along with applicant no.1. Therefore, in terms of the compromise deed, the parties have agreed to withdraw their cases against each other including the present case so that they may live amicably and peacefully.

¶9

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that his client has no objection, if the proceedings impugned in the present application are quashed in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶10

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the averment made in the complaint which transpires that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled their dispute amicably.

¶11

In view of law laid by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab and another i n Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.8989 of 2010 decided on 24 September, 2012, the aforesaid proceeding is hereby quashed.

¶12

Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., accordingly stands allowed.

¶13

A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.

¶14

Order Date :- 5.3.2018

¶15

MN/-

joni and 2 others v. state of up and another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

joni and 2 others v. state of up 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

Robin Krishna Tiwari and 6 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Nand Lal and 20 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Farman and 5 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Umesh Chand and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikash and 3 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Hari Om Sharma Vs State of Up and Another