Quashed

Guddu @ Chandrabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC22 Nov 2018CRLP/33573/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an FIR and criminal proceedings initiated under various IPC sections and the SC/ST Act. The court held that since the matter was amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case Crime No. 191 of 2018 and the impugned F.I.R. dated 21.9.2018 are hereby quashed.

Guddu @ Chandrabhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2018)

¶1

Court No. - 4

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 33573 of 2018

¶3

Petitioner :- Guddu @ Chandrabhan And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Puneet Bhadauria Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Bala Krishna Narayana,J. Hon'ble Rajiv Joshi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned A.G.A. for respondent No. 1, 2 and 3 and Sri Chandan Jaiswas, learned counsel for the respondent no. 4.

¶6

This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned F.I.R. dated 21.9.2018 registered as Case Crime No. 191 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act 1932, P.S.- Malawan, District- Etah.

¶7

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the parties have entered into compromise as stated by him in paragraph 9 of the writ petition and the respondent no. 3 does not want to pursue the matter any further as the matter has been amicably settled between the parties, therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶8

In view of the fact, the petitioner and respondent no. 4 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.

¶9

Thus, in view of the well settled principles 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 Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of investigation and another) , the proceedings of the Case Crime No. 191 of 2018, under Sections 147, 148, 341, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act 1932 and section 3(1)(r), 3(1)(s), 3(2)(va) of S.C./S.T. Act, P.S.- Malawan, District- Etah and the impugned F.I.R. are hereby quashed.

¶10

The present writ petition is accordingly allowed.

¶11

Order Date :- 22.11.2018 C. MANI

Guddu @ Chandrabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Guddu @ Chandrabhan and Another v. State of U.P. and 3 Others

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

Ram Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Shiv Bahadur Kushwaha Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Sarvesh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mukesh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Babu Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Naresh and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others