Allowed

Sheo Prasad Singh and Another v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC7 Aug 2019A482/20201/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the High Court quashed charges and proceedings arising from a case involving commercial dispute and compromise, citing Supreme Court precedents. The court held that as the dispute was settled and non-heinous, continuing the trial would be an abuse of process. The entire proceedings against the applicants were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings against the applicants in case no. 701 of 2018 were quashed.

Sheo Prasad Singh and Another Vs State of Up and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 20201 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Sheo Prasad Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of Up And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shankar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Avanish Kumar Srivastava,Ayush Khanna,Pradeep Kumar Tiwari

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit annexing the verification report of the court below as well as compromise entered into between the parties filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Sri Shiv Shankar Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Pradeep Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the state.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet as well as proceedings of case no. 701 of 2018 arising out of case crime no.23 of 2016 under Sections 120-B, 420, 421 IPC, P.S. Handia, District - Allahabad pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.9, Allahabad in terms of the compromise.

¶8

Pursuant to order dated 30.05.2019, the parties appeared before the court below for verification of settlement / compromise, who were duly identified by their counsel's, while verifying the compromise / settlement dated 30.07.2019.

¶9

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that all the disputes and differences have been settled between the parties. At this stage, learned counsel further submitted that continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid case will be an abuse of process of law. No fruitful purpose would be served in keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicants has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582.

¶10

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, opposite party no.2 has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed.

¶11

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel

¶12

for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶13

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in noncompoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in case the justice so demands. According to Hon'ble Supreme Court, if the offence involve private dispute between the parties of commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶14

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

¶15

In view of the above, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶16

The entire proceedings of aforesaid case against the applicants are quashed in terms of compromise.

¶17

Order Date :- 7.8.2019

¶18

Sheo Prasad Singh and Another v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheo Prasad Singh and Another 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

Shivraj and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhirendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Manish @ Neetu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mujammil and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gopal Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Chandrabhan Singh and 12 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another