Allowed

Rahul Gupta v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC25 Aug 2020A482/1464/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held applications under section 482 CrPC seeking quashing of proceedings under sections 498-A IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act allowed in view of a verified compromise deed between parties. Court set aside proceedings as personal family dispute mutually settled. Coercive steps stayed till order date.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of case no. 053003 of 2017 set aside; application allowed.

Rahul Gupta Vs State of Up and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 6

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1464 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Rahul Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Irshad Ahmad

¶4

Hon'ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant; Sri Irshad Ahmad appears for the opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 31.7.2017 as well as the entire proceedings of Case No. 053003 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 350 of 2016, under Sections- 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P.Act, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of A.C.J.M. Ghaziabad.

¶7

The matter was taken on 10.1.2020 and the Court has proceeded to pass a detailed order to the following effect.

¶8

"Vakalatnama filed today by Shri Irshad Ahmad, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶9

Joint compromise affidavit filed today on behalf of parties is also taken on record.

¶10

Heard Sri Ansar Ahmad, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Irshad Ahmad, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and the learned A.G.A.

¶11

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet as well as entire proceedings of case no. 053003 of 2017, arising out of case crime no. 350 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 & 506 IPC and 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, DistrictGhaziabad pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate 8th, Ghaziabad and further to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶12

It is submitted that on account of intervention of their well-wishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise shall be filed before the Court concerned. It is further contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶13

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can best be ascertained by the court where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

¶14

Put up this case as fresh on 28.2.2020 before the appropriate Bench.

¶15

Learned counsel for the parties undertake to ensure their presence alongwith parties and compromise paper before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 4.2.2020 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.

¶16

Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order as well as the photocopy of the joint compromise affidavit to the court concerned within a week.

¶17

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicants."

¶18

Thereafter again on 13.7.2020, the Court has directed to issue a reminder to the trial court for making compliance of the order dated 10.1.2020.

¶19

In response thereof, as per office report dated 7.8.2020, reminder has been issued to the court concerned but report regarding the same has not been received.

¶20

On the other hand, learned counsel for the applicant files an affidavit bringing on record a certified copy of the compromise deed dated 12.2.2020, which has been acknowledged by the court below. The same has been acknowledged by Sri Irshad Ahmad.

¶21

In view of the fact that the husband and wife do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter is purely of personal nature and family dispute, which has been mutually settled between the parties, in view of the compromise dated 12.2.2020, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶22

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another ) , the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

¶23

The present application is accordingly allowed .

¶24

Order Date :- 25.8.2020 A.K.Srivastava

Rahul Gupta v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Gupta 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

Shiv Nath Singh @ Raja Babu and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munib Chandra Maurya @ Munim Kumar Maurya and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Usha Rani Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Mohammad Ayub and 9 Othes Vs the State of Up and Another

Shahrukh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Omprakash @ Ompal Vs Smt. Babli