Allowed

Nitin and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 May 2019A482/15872/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act following a verified compromise between parties. The court held that with mutual settlement and no intent to continue the case, proceeding further would serve no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Complaint Case No.3813 of 2018 under Sections 498A IPC and Section 4 Dowry Prohibition Act set aside.

Nitin and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15872 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Nitin And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Chaurasia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri P.K. Chaurasia, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sarvesh Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent.

¶7

By way of the instant application, the applicants have sought quashment of the proceeding in Complaint Case No.3813 of 2018, Smt. Sapna Vs. Nitin and others, under Sections 498A I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Narsaina, District Bulandshahar, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Bulandshahar.

¶8

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that in this case, worth compromise has been reached between the parties and the compromise meant to be verified by the court below has been verified by it on 02.05.2019, copy whereof has been annexed as annexure-SA-2 to the supplementary affidavit. 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 on 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) , in support of his contention.

¶9

It has been further added that if proceeding of the aforesaid case is allowed to go on then that will not result in conviction and possibility of conviction is bleak. Therefore, proceedings in the aforesaid case initiated by opposite party no.2 against the applicant is liable to be quashed in terms of the compromise between the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. have no objection, if this application is allowed and the

¶11

proceedings are quashed.

¶12

In view of the fact that the applicant and opposite party no. 2 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.

¶13

Thus, in view of above, the proceeding in Complaint Case No.3813 of 2018, Smt. Sapna Vs. Nitin and others, under Sections 498A I.P.C. and Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Narsaina, District Bulandshahar, pending in the court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Bulandshahar, is hereby set aside.

¶14

Accordingly, the present application is allowed.

¶15

Let a copy of this order be sent to the court below for necessary information and follow up action.

¶16

Order Date :- 23.5.2019 rkg

Nitin and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nitin and 5 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Narendra Vs State of U.P.

Sandeep Garg Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Mubarak Ali and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi Kumar Soni and 2 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gavendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kamlesh Chaurasia Vs State of U.P. and Another