Allowed

Adnan Qureshi and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2020A482/43868/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings filed under various IPC sections and the United Province Special Power Act. The court held that since the dispute between the parties was amicably settled, continuing the trial served no purpose and would be a waste of time.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Case Crime no. 107 of 2011 under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 6 United Province Special Power Act are quashed.

Adnan Qureshi and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2020)

¶1

Court No. - 78

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43868 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Adnan Qureshi And Anr Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Azhar Hussain,Ravitendra Pratap Singh Chandel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,A.Z.Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit annexing the verification report filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard Shri Azhar Hussain, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri A.Z.Khan, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the state.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case Crime no. 107 of 2011, under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 6 United Province Special Power Act, P.S. Mantola, District- Agra.

¶8

It is submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that all the disputes pending between the parties have been settled by them. Parties appeared before the court concerned in compliance of the order dated 29.11.2019 passed by this Court for verification of the compromise and court below vide order dated 13.12.2019 verified the compromise and prepared report to this effect (SA2). Referring to the aforesaid fact, learned counsel for the applicants further submitted that offence under Section 6 United Province Special Power Act is not attracted in the present matter. Since parties have settled the dispute, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant has also placed reliance on 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 has been settled, opposite party no.2 has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed.

¶10

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel

¶11

for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶12

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

¶13

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, 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 u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

¶15

The entire proceedings of Case Crime no. 107 of 2011, under Sections 143, 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 6 United Province Special Power Act, P.S. Mantola, District- Agra against the applicants are quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶16

Order Date :- 12.2.2020 Sanjeet

Adnan Qureshi and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adnan Qureshi and Anr. 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

Arjun and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish @ Rinku Vs State of Up and Anr.

Tribhuwan Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Subhash Chandra Sharma Vs State of Up and Another

Manish Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anand Prakash Mishra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another