Allowed

Umesh Tiwari and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC30 Jul 2021A227/8116/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Article 227 petition, the High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under various IPC and SC/ST Act provisions. The petitioners sought to set aside a summoning order based on a compromise agreement reached outside the court between the parties.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case No. 504 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 287 of 2016 are quashed.

Umesh Tiwari and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8116 of 2016

¶3

Petitioner :- Umesh Tiwari And 5 Others Respondent :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Petitioner :- Chandra Prakash Singh,Awadhesh Kumar Mishra

¶4

Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.,Vidit Narayan Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned counsel for respondent no.2 as well learned A.G.A. for the State and have gone through the record.

¶7

This petition has been filed for setting aside summoning order dated 6.9.2016 passed by learned Additional District Judge Court No. 3, Kushinagar, in Case No. 504 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 287 of 2016, under Section 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC and Section 3(1) (X) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Nebuwa Naurangiya, District- Kushinagar, in terms of the compromise.

¶8

It is submitted that on account of intervention of their wellwishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The learned counsel for the applicant has drawn my attention to annexure-3 a compromise arises between the contesting parties by which both the parties have sorted out their differences and dispute out side the court. This fact of compromise has been confirmed and nodded in affirmative by the counsel for the opposite party no.2 and it has been jointly submitted that there would be no harm and error, it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in the light of the compromise.

¶9

The attention of this Court has been drawn to the following judgements of the Apex Court:-

¶10

1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675

¶11

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008)9 SCC 677]

¶12

3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1,

¶13

4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303

¶14

5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶15

In the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another [2013 (83) ACC 278] in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶16

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case. Therefore, the application is liable to be allowed.

¶17

The present petition Under Article 227 stands allowed . Keeping in view the compromise arrived at between the parties, the proceeding of Case Case No. 504 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No. 287 of 2016, under Section 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452 IPC and Section 3(1) (X) of SC/ST Act, P.S. Nebuwa Naurangiya, District- Kushinagar, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Kushinagar, is hereby quashed.

¶18

Let a copy of the order be transmitted to the Court below immediately.

¶19

Order Date :- 30.7.2021 S.Verma

Umesh Tiwari and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Umesh Tiwari and 5 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagjeewan Lal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jai Prakash Giri Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Radha Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Seema Parveen Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Sultan Singh and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Pramod Kumar Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another