Quashed

Ramesh Chand@Ramesh Chandra and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC2 May 2019A482/10337/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashed the criminal proceedings under Sections 406, 420, and 120-B IPC pending against the applicant due to a verified compromise between the parties, citing Narinder Singh. The court held that no useful purpose would be served in continuing the case.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the entire criminal proceedings, charge sheet, and cognizance in Case No. 3499 of 2018.

Ramesh Chand@Ramesh Chandra and 2 Others Vs State of Up… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10337 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Ramesh Chand@Ramesh Chandra And 2 Others

¶4

Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Pyare Tipathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashutosh Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶6

Counter affidavit filed is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Sri Shiv Prakash Tiwari, holding brief of Sri R.P. Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 3499 of 2018 (State vs. Ramesh Chandra and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 271 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 120-B I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, impugned charge sheet dated 12.5.2018 as well as cognizance dated 3.7.2018, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad.

¶9

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that the dispute between the parties has been compromised. The letter send by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate dated 10.4.2019 indicates that in this case, the compromise has been physically verified between the parties and the letter is also available on the file. It is thus, argued that the continuance of the criminal proceedings against the applicants is bad in law. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance in the matter reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466 in the matter of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another in support of his contention.

¶10

Sri Ashutosh Tripathi, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 also does not dispute the fact of compromise and has stated that in view of the compromise he does not want to pursue the matter any further.

¶11

The dispute has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the application pending.

¶12

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Judgement reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466, Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another , the entire proceedings of Case No. 3499 of 2018 (State vs. Ramesh Chandra and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 271 of 2018, under Sections 406, 420, 120-B

¶13

I.P.C., Police Station Sihani Gate, District Ghaziabad, impugned charge sheet dated 12.5.2018 as well as cognizance dated 3.7.2018, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Ghaziabad, is hereby quashed.

¶14

The instant application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶15

Order Date :- 2.5.2019 S Rawat

Ramesh Chand@Ramesh Chandra and 2 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramesh Chand@Ramesh Chandra 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

Mohd Naseem and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Haris Husain @ Raja and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pushpa Vs State of U.P.and Another

Amar Jeet Singh Taneja and Another Vs State of Up and Another

Rajkaran Vs State of Up and Another

Smt Usha Verma Vs State of Up and Another