Allowed

Vibha Chauhan and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2019A482/13701/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under sections 452, 323, and 324 IPC, relying on an amicable settlement and compromise deed between the parties. The court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings post-settlement.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the summoning order dated 01.12.2017 and all proceedings in Complaint Case no.7635/9 of 2016 under sections 452, 323, 324 IPC.

Vibha Chauhan and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 75

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13701 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Vibha Chauhan And 2 Ors Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vidya Shanker Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajatshatru Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State, Sri Ajatshatru Pandey, learned counsel for Opposite Party No.2 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 01.12.2017 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1, Muzaffar Nagar, in criminal complaint case no.7635/9 of 2016, Vivek Kumar Vs. Mohit @ Manvendra and others, under sections 452, 323, 324 IPC, P.S.Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar.

¶7

At the very outset opposite party no.2 has stated that applicant no. 1 is wife of opposite party no.2.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that with the intervention of respected members of the family, they had amicably settled their disputes. He has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement deed annexed as Annexure C.A.-I and in paragraphs no 10 and 11, of the said settlement deed it has been stated that in view of the compromise reached between the parties they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceeding.

¶9

Learned counsel for the Opposite Party No.2 has also stated that the parties have entered into a compromise and they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants and has no objection, if the entire criminal proceedings are quashed.

¶10

This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:

¶11

1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675

¶12

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008)9 SCC 677]

¶13

3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1

¶14

4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303

¶15

5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶16

Wherein the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another [2013 (83) ACC 278], in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶17

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶18

Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case no.7635/9 of 2016, (Vivek Kumar Vs. Mohit @ Manvendra and others), under sections 452, 323, 324 IPC, P.S.Nai Mandi, District Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, court no.1, Muzaffar Nagar, are hereby quashed.

¶19

The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶20

Order Date :- 21.11.2019 PKC

Vibha Chauhan and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vibha Chauhan and 2 Ors. v. State of U.P. 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

Smt. Saroj Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shankar Lal Kandora and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rahul Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vimla Devi and Others Vs State of Up and Another

Smt. Chanda Vishwakarma and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.