Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed to quash proceedings where some accused were acquitted and the remaining dispute was matrimonial with a compromise reached.
Proceedings under Section 406 IPC falling under Complaint Case No. 523 of 2013 were entirely 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. - 66
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12792 of 2015
Applicant :- Shailesh Tripathi And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,T K Mishra
Hon'ble Rajul Bhargava,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri K.K. Yadav, holding brief of Sri T. K. Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for State and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing entire proceeding in Complaint Case No.523 of 2013 (Smt. Laxmi Vs. Shailesh Tripathi and others), under Section 406 I.P.C., P.S. Refinery, District Mathura, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Mathura.
It has been argued by the learned counsel for the applicants that in terms of Court’s order dated 20.02.2017, applicant nos.1, 2 and 6, namely, Shailesh Tripathi, Bajrangi Tripathi and Smt. Indrawati Tripathi have appeared before the trial court and the trial proceeding against them continued and ultimately vide judgement and order dated 5.06.2018 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.3, Mathura, they have been acquitted. Certified copy of the judgement and order has been produced before this Court which is taken on record.
Learned counsel for the applicants has argued that so far as applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5 are concerned, they are brother-in-law ( Dewar ), uncle-in-law ( Chachia Sasur ) and brother-in-law ( Jeth ) of opposite party no.2 and essentially the dispute between the parties is matrimonial one. The opposite party no.2 has entered into compromise with her husband and other accused who have been acquitted on the basis of her resiling from prosecution version. At present, so far as other applicants are concerned, a joint affidavit has been filed by both the parties
and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 states that his client has no objection if the proceedings are quashed against the applicant nos. 3, 4 and 5, namely,Sarvesh, Brijesh and Vijay Tripathi.
In view of aforesaid, the proceeding of aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
Criminal Misc. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., accordingly stands allowed. A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith. Order Date :- 8.1.2020
MN/-
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings under Section 406 IPC should be quashed given the acquittal of some accused and compromise regarding the others?
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Shailesh Tripathi And 5 Others
State of U.P.
Rajul Bhargava
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
