The High Court quashed criminal proceedings instituted under sections 498A IPC etc. on the basis of a compromise affidavit filed by the parties, invoking Section 482 CrPC and relying on Apex Court precedents allowing compromise in certain cognizable offences.
The entire proceedings and impugned charge sheet are quashed.
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. - 69 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 15883 of 2019 Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Singh And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prabhat Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vivek Kumar Singh,J.
Heard Sri Prabhat Tripathi, learned counsel for the applicants, and Sri Sanjay Singh, learned AGA for the State.
This application has been filed under section 482 Cr.PC with prayer to stay/quash the entire proceedings and impugned charge sheet dated 9.1.2016 in Case No. 117 of 2016 (State v. Mukesh Singh) arising out of Case Crime No. 50 of 2015 under sections 498A, 323, 506, 325 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station- Tharwai, District- Allahabad on the basis of compromise affidavit dated 5.10.2018 which is pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate,, court no. 1, Allahabad.
It is contended by learned counsel for the applicant that parties have entered into compromise on 5.10.2018, and as on date no dispute exist between the parties and to this effect a copy of the compromise affidavit has been filed and annexed as Annexure- 3, to the affidavit filed in support of this application.
In view of the above contention that parties have entered into compromise and they do not want to proceed with the case, this Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:- B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675; Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation[2008)9 SCC 677]; Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others (2008) 16 SCC 1; Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab (2014) 6 SCC 466 .
In the aforesaid cases, 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.
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.
Accordingly, the proceedings of the aforesaid Case are hereby, quashed .
The application is, accordingly, allowed.
There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 25.4.2019 ssm
1 issue framed by the court
Whether proceedings under sections 498A IPC et al. should be quashed on basis of compromise affidavit filed under Section 482 CrPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and anotherReferred¶6
(2003)4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of InvestigationReferred¶6
[2008)9 SCC 677] · Who else cites this
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and othersReferred¶6
(2008) 16 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶6
(2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶6
(2014) 6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And anotherReferred¶7
[2013 (83) ACC 278]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mukesh Kumar Singh And 2 Others
Vivek Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
