Allowed

Sandeep Kumar and Anothers v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Anothers

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2022/3338/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC, read with Dowry Prohibition Act, and related offences. Quashing was granted based on a verified settlement agreement entered into between the parties, citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in Criminal Case No.138761 of 2019 and the charge-sheet are quashed.

Sandeep Kumar and Anothers Vs State of U.P. Thru… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 10

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3338 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Anothers Counsel for Applicant :- Archana Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ambika Prasad,Rajesh Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

¶5

1. Heard and perused the record.

¶6

By way of this application under Section 482 CrPC, the applicants have prayed for quashing of the charge-sheet no.1 of 208 dated 19.10.2018 filed in Crime/FIR No.0385 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 420 and 498-A IPC read with Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act lodged at Police Station P.G.I., District Lucknow, for quashing of the order dated 23.07.2019 by means of which cognizance of the offence has been taken and for quashing of the proceedings of Criminal Case No.138761 of 2019 (State Vs. Sandeep Kumar & others), pending in the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.)/F.T.C., Lucknow.

¶7

The dispute is matrimonial one. The ground, on which quashing of the impugned proceedings has been prayed, is a settlement agreement entered into between the parties. The settlement agreement entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned Civil Judge (J.D.)/Judicial Magistrate, Fast Track Court, Lucknow vide its report dated 16.06.2022.

¶8

Considering the above and 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 to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the same would be an exercise in futility.

¶9

Hence, this application is allowed . Consequently, the impugned proceedings are hereby quashed.

¶10

The settlement/agreement dated 08.06.2022, entered into between the parties, shall be made part of this order and while, issuing certified copy of this order, the office shall issue certified copy of the settlement/agreement entered into between the parties. Order Date :- 16.8.2022 MVS/-

¶11

Digitally signed by MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN Date: 2022.08.16 18:41:24 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Sandeep Kumar and Anothers v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Anothers

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandeep Kumar and Anothers v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home and Anothers

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

Ram Raj Verma Vs State of U.P.and 3 Ors.

Abdul Kalam Vs the State of U.P.and 9 Ors.

Habib Ahmad Vs State of U.P.and Anothers.

Smt. Geeta Awasthi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Prakash and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko and Another

Abdul Rauf Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home