The Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the ground of an amicable settlement and compromise between the parties in a cross-case scenario.
Proceedings under Section 147, 148, 452, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C. were quashed and the application was allowed.
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. - 52
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8628 of 2018
Applicant :- Farhat Husain And 4 Ors Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pawan Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Sushil Ojha, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing entire proceeding in Criminal Case No.993/9 of 2017 (State Vs.Farhat Husain and others), arising out of Case Crime No.442 of 2016, under Sections 147, 148, 452, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Kandhala, District Shamli, pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Kairana, District Shamli.
Learned counsel for the parties have states that these are cross cases. In the cross case in which the F.I.R. was lodged from the side of the applicant and the same was challenged by accused Mohd. Abbas and four others by means of Criminal Misc. Application No.8077 of 2018, on the basis of compromise between the parties and affidavit filed in support thereof by the informant, proceedings of the case has been quashed and the aforesaid application stood allowed. Therefore, it is contended that instant case being cross case in which both the sides have entered into a compromise and joint affidavit of the applicants and first informant-injured has been filed may also be quashed as 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.
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.
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.
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.
Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., accordingly stands allowed.
A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.
Order Date :- 29.3.2018
MN/-
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. upon amicable settlement and compromise between cross-applying parties.
Whether the power of the High Court under inherent powers can be exercised to quash criminal proceedings where parties have mutually agreed to withdraw cases.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab and anotherApplied¶10
Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab and another in Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.8989 of 2010
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Farhat Husain And 4 Ors
State Of U.P. And Another
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
