In this Section 482 CrPC application, the court quashed the complaint case involving multiple charges including Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 392, 494, 307, 342 of IPC following a valid compromise between the applicants and the State.
The proceedings of the complaint case including summoning order dated 12.10.2017 were quashed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5011 of 2021
Applicant :- Haidar Ali And 8 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Dubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Umesh Kumar,J.
Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Dubey, learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State-opposite party no.1 and perused the material placed on record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 224 of 2017 (Shalim Khan vs. Haidar Ali and others), under Sections 147, 149, 323, 504, 506, 392, 494, 307, 342 of IPC, P.S. Hasayan, District- Hathras, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Hathras as well as summoning order dated 12.10.2017, in terms of the compromise entered into between the parties.
It is submitted that on account of intervention of their wellwishers, a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. The said compromise has been filed before the court concerned which has been properly verified by the court concerned. The certified copy of the said compromise has been filed as Annexure-4 to the affidavit.
The attention of this Court has been drawn to the following judgements of the Apex Court:-
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.
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 complaint case.
In view of the above, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby, quashed.
The application is, accordingly, allowed . There shall be no order as to costs.
Let a copy of this order be sent to trial court concerned within a week for communication and necessary action.
Order Date :- 21.9.2021 Vikas
1 issue framed by the court
Whether High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 CrPC upon a valid compromise between parties in cognizable and non-compoundable offences.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and anotherReferred¶9
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003)4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of InvestigationReferred¶10
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008)9 SCC 677] · Who else cites this
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and othersReferred¶11
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1, · Who else cites this
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶12
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶13
Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466. · Who else cites this
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And anotherExplained¶15
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another [2013 (83) ACC 278]
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Haidar Ali And 8 Others
Umesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
