Dismissed

Golu Alias Ajay and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Allahabad HC21 Nov 2019A482/41275/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single-judge bench dismissed an application seeking quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The High Court refused the prayer, holding that serious offences involving mental depravity like murder, rape, and dacoity are not private in nature and cannot be quashed merely on the basis of a compromise, citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for quashing of entire criminal proceedings under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B IPC and 4 POCSO Act was refused and application dismissed.

Golu Alias Ajay and Anr. Vs State of U.P… — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 66 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41275 of 2019 Applicant :- Golu Alias Ajay And Anr Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Ors Counsel for Applicant :- Dileep Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Kamendra Singh

¶2

Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Dileep Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Kamendra Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶4

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings in Special Case No.65 of 2015 (State vs. Golu @ Ajay and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 362 of 2015, under Sections 363, 366, 376, 120-B I.P.C. and 4 POCSO Act, Police Station- Prem Nagar, District- Jhansi, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge/POCSO Act, Jhansi as well as other consequential proceedings thereof on the basis of compromise between the parties dated 5.11.2019.

¶5

Submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. The victim has now solemnized marriage with some other person and she has entered into compromise with the applicants and has filed a compromise dated 5.11.2019. Therefore, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties, the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶6

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that his client has no objection, if the proceedings impugned in the present application are quashed in exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶7

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the averments made in the first information report.

¶8

In view of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of Gian Singh vs State Of Punjab and another in Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.8989 of 2010 decided on 24 September, 2012 and Narinder Singh and others vs State of Punjab and another reported in (2014) 6 SCC 466 in which it has been held that " Such power is not to be exercised in those prosecutions which involve heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity etc. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on society ." Therefore, the prayer for quashing the entire criminal proceedings is hereby refused.

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶10

Order Date :- 21.11.2019/ Vikas

Golu Alias Ajay and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Golu Alias Ajay and Anr. v. State of U.P. and 2 Ors.

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.Sarvesh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Narain Pradhan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Roop Kishor Seth Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pradeep @ Prudumbh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Kanha Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Montu Vs State of U.P. and Another