Allowed

Mukesh Singh Alias Brijesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC15 Nov 2021A482/3673/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Sections 498A IPC and Dowry Act arising from matrimonial discord. The court found the parties had compromised and restored their relationship, holding that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the trial.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 33 of 2008 under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act were quashed.

Mukesh Singh Alias Brijesh Singh and Another Vs… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2021)

¶1

Court No. - 80

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3673 of 2009

¶3

Applicant :- Mukesh Singh Alias Brijesh Singh And Another

¶4

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhir Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate

¶5

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶6

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed an affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Shahnawaz Akhtar, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 33 of 2008 (State Vs. Viresh Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2007, under Sections 498-A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Court Room No.18, Azamgarh.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicant no.1 is Jeth and applicant no.2 is Jethani of opposite party no.2 and on account of matrimonial discord, instant criminal proceedings has been initiated against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of the respected members of both the family, applicants and the opposite party no.2 have compromised the matter and opposite party no.2 and her husband have restored their relationship and now, they are living as husband and wife under one roof.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties, entire proceedings, initiated against the applicants, be quashed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 Smt. Sarita Singh and in para 5 and 7 of the affidavit, it has been stated that parties have settled all their disputes and differences and the opposite party no.2

¶12

and her husband have restored their relationship and presently, they are living as husband and wife under one roof and they are leading a happy married life.

¶13

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has next submitted that said compromise has been made out of free will and consent of opposite party no.2 and she does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and also, she has no objection, if the entire criminal proceedings, initiated against the applicants, is quashed.

¶14

This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of :-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

Wherein 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, law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶21

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.

¶22

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 33 of 2008 (State Vs. Viresh Singh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2007, under Sections 498A, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Phoolpur, District Azamgarh, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.), Court Room No.18,

¶23

Azamgarh, are hereby quashed.

¶24

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶25

Order Date :- 15.11.2021 Nadim

Mukesh Singh Alias Brijesh Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mukesh Singh Alias Brijesh Singh and Another 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

Swami Sharan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Sharma and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Rajesh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dharmaveer and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Tejram @ Tejpal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another