Allowed

Rajnish Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC14 Jan 2020A482/1809/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings based on an amicable settlement between parties, citing Supreme Court precedents allowing quashing in non-compoundable matrimonial disputes.

What did the court decide?

Entire criminal proceedings of case no. 771 of 2019 arising out of crime no. 38 of 2019 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act are quashed.

Rajnish Tyagi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1809 of 2020 Applicant :- Rajnish Tyagi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Satyam Narayan Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶3

Certified copy of compromise verification report filed today is taken on record.

¶4

The present application u/s 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the charge sheet and entire proceedings of case no. 771 of 2019, arising out of case crime no. 38 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Hapur Dehat, District Hapur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hapur. Further prayer has been made to stay the further proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶5

Heard Shri Satyam Narayan, learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned AGA appearing for the State and perused the record.

¶6

It appears that applicants had earlier approached this Court through application u/s 482 no. 36114 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 27.9.2019 directing the Court below to verify the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶7

Pursuant to the directions given by this Court vide aforesaid order dated 27.9.2019, parties appeared before the the Court below and the Court verified the said compromise vide its order dated 16.11.2019. The said compromise verification report has been filed today.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the parties have settled their disputes amicably, the proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in view of 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 .

¶9

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the entire record including the compromise affidavit and the verification report.

¶10

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in non-compoundable 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 disputes and it is not related to a heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶11

Since all the disputes and differences between the parties have been amicably and mutually settled and parties have decided to part their ways, 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.

¶12

In view of the above, the application is allowed. The entire criminal proceedings of case no.771 of 2019, arising out of case crime no. 38 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Hapur Dehat, District Hapur, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hapur are quashed.

¶13

Order Date :- 14.1.2020/safi

Rajnish Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajnish Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jameel Ahmad Vs State of Up and Anr.

Lavkush @ Lavkush Gupta and 5 Ors. Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Chandrashekhar and 2 Ors. Vs State of Up and 2 Ors.

Smt. Kiran Tomar Vs State of Up and 4 Others

Avijit Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Verma and 2 Ors. Vs State of Up and Anr.