Court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in a matrimonial dispute after parties filed a settlement agreement, relying on Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise to quash certain offences.
Entire proceedings of Case No. 7581 of 2019 under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC are quashed. No order as to costs.
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. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7438 of 2021
Applicant :- Raj Kumar Prince And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Paritosh Sukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ajay Kumar Shukla
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has filed short counter affidavit today in Court, which is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State/opposite party no.1, Shri Ajay Kumar Shukla, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge-sheet no. 701 of 2019, dated 17.09.2019, cognizance order dated 11.11.2019 and entire proceedings of Case No. 7581 of 2019 (State Vs. Raj Kumar Prince and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 790 of 2019, under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Etah, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah.
Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that Muskan, daughter of applicant no.1 was married to Rishabh, son of opposite party no.2, and on account of matrimonial discord, instant criminal proceedings has been initiated, however, with the intervention of the respected members of both the family, applicants and the opposite party no.2 have compromised the matter and they have amicably settled all their disputes and differences in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them and they do not have any grievance against each other.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that a settlement agreement dated 17.09.2021 has also been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as CA-1 to the short counter affidavit, filed today in Court.
Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise deed dated 17.09.2021, entire proceedings, initiated against the applicants, be quashed.
Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also
appeared and has filed short counter affidavit and in paragraph 3, 4 and 5 of the said affidavit, opposite party no.2 has acknowledged the compromise made between the parties and has stated that they have settled all their disputes and differences. It has been further stated by opposite party no.2 that he has no objection, if the entire criminal proceedings, initiated against the applicants, be quashed in terms of compromise deed dated 17.09.2021.
This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of :-
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 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 case. Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 7581 of 2019 (State Vs. Raj Kumar Prince and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 790 of 2019, under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Etah, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah, are hereby quashed.
This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Order Date :- 11.11.2021 Nadim
2 issues framed by the court
Whether compromise between parties in matrimonial dispute warrants quashing of initiated criminal proceedings under Sections 406, 323, 504, 506 IPC.
Whether settlement deed dated 17.09.2021 sufficiently demonstrates amicable settlement to quash proceedings.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and anotherReferred¶14
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¶15
Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677] · Who else cites this
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and othersReferred¶16
Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶17
Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of PunjabReferred¶18
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¶19
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278]
Raj Kumar Prince and 3 Others
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
