Allowed

Suresh Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC8 May 2019A482/8294/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashes a charge-sheet and cognizance order in a criminal case under Sections 352, 323, 504, 506, 427 IPC. The High Court allowed the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. relying on the settled principle that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding when the dispute has been amicably settled and a compromise is in place.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of charge-sheet dated 15.8.2017 in case no. 5493 of 2017 and cognizance order dated 7.9.2017.

Suresh Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8294 of 2018

¶3

Applicant :- Suresh Yadav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiva Kant Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vipin Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Heard, learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet dated 15.8.2017 in case no. 5493 of 2017 (State vs. Suresh and others), arising out of case crime no. 262 of 2017 under sections 352, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh as well as the cognizance order dated 7.9.2017 passed in the aforesaid case.

¶7

26.4.2019 is the report of physical verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. Both the parties have accepted the compromise on record. It has been claimed that in this case, the dispute has been resolved and the parties have settled their differences and now they wish to live peacefully in future and no useful purpose will be served, if the proceeding is allowed to go on from hence onward. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance in the matter reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466 in the matter of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another in support of his contention.

¶8

Learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 also does not dispute the fact of compromise and has stated that in view of the compromise he does not want to pursue the matter any further.

¶9

The dispute has been amicably settled between the parties, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the application pending.

¶10

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466 in the matter of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another in support of his contention, the charge-sheet dated 15.8.2017 in case no. 5493 of 2017 (State vs. Suresh and others), arising out of case crime no. 262 of 2017 under sections 352, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., Police Station Mubarakpur, District Azamgarh as well as the cognizance order dated 7.9.2017 passed in the aforesaid case, is hereby quashed.

¶11

The instant application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶12

Order Date :- 8.5.2019 S Rawat

Suresh Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Suresh Yadav and 3 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bhanu Gupta Vs State of U.P.and Another

Smt. Kumkum Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. and 11 Others

Pramod Kumar Mishra Vs State of Up and Another

Sujan @ Sunnu @ Surendra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Arvind Bhargav Vs State of U.P.

Pankaj Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another