Ankit Singhal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

¶1

Court No. - 74 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2131 of 2020 Applicant :- Ankit Singhal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Pandey,Rajnish Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶2

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶3

Vakalatnama alongwith counter affidavit filed today by Shri Ashvni Mishra, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 is taken on record.

¶4

The present application u/s 482 CrPC has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of case no. 27 of 2019, arising out of case crime no. 285 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Meerut, pending in the Addl. J.S.S.C., Court No.1, Meerut. Further prayer has been made to stay the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case.

¶5

Heard S/Shri S.K.Pandey and R.K. Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Ashvni Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 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. 39317 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 5.9.2019 directing the Court below to verify the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶7

Pursuant to the directions given by this Court vide foresaid order dated 5.9.2019, parties appeared before the the Court below and the Court verified the said compromise vide its order dated 25.11.2019, which is annexure-8 to this application.

¶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

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties have been settled, the opposite party has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed. In this regard, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also referred to the averments made in the counter affidavit.

¶10

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

¶11

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

¶12

to a heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

¶13

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.

¶14

In view of the above, the application is allowed .

¶15

The entire criminal proceedings of case no. 27 of 2019, arising out of case crime no. 285 of 2014, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Meerut, pending in the Addl. J.S.S.C., Court No.1, Meerut are quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 17.1.2020 safi

Ankit Singhal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ankit Singhal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kiran Tomar Vs State of Up and 4 Others

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

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

Shamshad Ahmad and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Rajbhar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aashish Kumar Mishra @ Aashish Kumar Fatendra Nath Mishra Vs State of Up and Another