Allowed

Mohammad Furkan and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.

Allahabad HC23 Aug 2022/168/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings concerning matrimonial disputes. The court quashed the proceedings following a verified compromise arrived at between the parties outside the court, holding that continuation would be futile.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed; proceedings of Case No.739 of 2017, Crime No.98 of 2016 under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act quashed.

Mohammad Furkan and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 168 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Mohammad Furkan And Ors. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Alishah Faruqi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohammad Akram Siddiqui

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking quashing entire proceedings of Case No.739 of 2017, Crime No.98 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Saadatganj, Lucknow pending before ACJM-III, Lucknow.

¶6

Notice on behalf of the State has been accepted by learned A.G.A.

¶7

Learned counsels for the parties submit that they have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at the compromise. Compromise entered into between the parties have been placed on record as Annexure-3 to the petition. The parties have confirmed the terms of the compromise. Compromise has been verified between the parties by Senior Registrar of this Court vide order dated 08.12.2021 in compliance of the order dated 23.11.2021 passed by this Court.

¶8

I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.

¶9

Considering the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675 , Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1 , Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466 , it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶10

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present petition is allowed and

¶11

proceedings of Case No.739 of 2017, Crime No.98 of 2016, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC, 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Saadatganj, Lucknow pending before ACJM-III, Lucknow are hereby quashed.

¶12

( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )

¶13

Order Date :- 23.8.2022 prateek

¶14

Digitally signed by PRATEEK ARORA Date: 2022.08.23 18:20:55 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohammad Furkan and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammad Furkan and Ors. v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Anr.

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

Jai Jai Ram and Anr. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secretary Home

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Mithilesh Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar Tiwari Vs State of U.P. and Ors.

Vasail Ahmad and Ors. Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Vijay Veer Singh and Anr. Vs the State of U.P and Anr.