Allowed

Shahrukh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC14 Feb 2022A482/26628/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings and compromise proceedings against the applicants. Quashing was permitted despite the offences being non-compoundable, relying on Supreme Court precedents allowing settlement-based quashing to secure the ends of justice.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet dated 18.12.2020, the order dated 21.01.2021, and the entire criminal proceedings against the applicants were quashed.

Shahrukh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 89

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26628 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Shahrukh And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Salman Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saqib Meezan

¶4

Hon'ble Anil Kumar Ojha,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This Application U/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 18.12.2020, order dated 21.01.2021 as well as entire proceedings against the applicants in Case No. 297 of 2021 (State vs. Shahrukh and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 18 of 2020, under Section 498-A, 323 & 506 of I.P.C. & Section 3/4 of D.P. Act and Section 3/4 Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Act, 2019, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Jalaun, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai, on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.

¶7

The submission of the learned counsel for the applicants is that the compromise has been arrived at between the parties before the court below.

¶8

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 also stated that they have no objection to compromise being allowed.

¶9

Report with regard to verification of compromise is kept at Flag 'A' as per the office report dated 08.02.2022.

¶10

In B.S. Joshi and others v. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 , Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non-compoundable offence.

¶11

In Parbatbhai Aahir Alias Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and others v. State of Gujarat and others , passed in Criminal Appeal No.1723 of 2017, arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No 9549 of 2016 , three judge bench of Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down broad principles for exercising the inherent powers of High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Relevant extract is quoted hereinbelow:

¶12

"16.2. The invocation of the jurisdiction of the High Court to

¶13

quash a first information report or a criminal proceeding on the ground that a settlement has been arrived at between the offender and the victim is not the same as the invocation of jurisdiction for the purpose of compounding an offence. While compounding an offence, the power of the court is governed by the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The power to quash under Section 482 is attracted even if the offence is non-compoundable."

¶14

Recently, Hon'ble Apex Court in Jaswant Singh v. State of Punjab & Anr. passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1233 of 2021 arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 7072 of 2021, relied upon the aforesaid authority.

¶15

As parties have amicably settled their dispute, hence, it would be appropriate to quash the proceedings to secure the ends of justice.

¶16

In view of above and law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid authorities, the proceedings of the aforesaid case deserves to be quashed.

¶17

The charge sheet dated 18.12.2020, order dated 21.01.2021 as well as entire proceedings against the applicants in above mentioned case stands quashed.

¶18

In the result, the instant application is allowed.

¶19

Order Date :- 14.2.2022 v.k.updh.

¶20

Digitally signed by VINOD KUMAR UPADHYAY Date: 2022.02.15 11:36:35 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shahrukh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrukh and 4 Others 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajendra Vs State of Up and Another

Tasuwar @ Tashur Vs State of U.P. and Another

Akhand Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Khushi Chittodiya and Another Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Raj Dev Saroj Vs State of U.P.and Another

Dhanbeer Mishra Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others