Allowed

Shivnarayan Dubey @ Dabbu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Nov 2022A482/3870/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash session trial proceedings arising from an offence under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act. The Court relied on the Ramawatar judgment, noting the amicable compromise, parties' peaceful coexistence, and the trivial nature of the dispute regarding irrigation water.

What did the court decide?

Session Trial No.0089 of 2009 arising out of Case Crime No. 1760 of 2008 is quashed; parties directed to deposit Rs. 1000/- each.

Shivnarayan Dubey @ Dabbu and Another Vs State of U.P… — Caste Atrocities | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 84

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3870 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shivnarayan Dubey @ Dabbu And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Sengar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Govind

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Ajay Sengar, learned counsel for applicants, Sri Bramhanand Upadhyay, learned AGA for State and Sri Prabhanjan Mishra, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ram Govind, learned counsel for Opposite Party No. 2.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of proceedings of Session Trial No. 0089 of 2009 (State of U.P. vs. Shivnarayan Dubey alias Dabbu and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 1760 of 2008, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun.

¶7

The parties to dispute have amicably settled their dispute and filed a compromise agreement which has been verified by Court concerned and report thereof is before this Court.

¶8

In order to ascertain, whether the requirement to quash proceedings on basis of compromise even in the offence under Special Act, namely, Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, in the light of judgment passed by Supreme Court in Ramawatar vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 966 are fulfilled, I have carefully perused the facts of present case.

¶9

Parties are residents of same village and the dispute arose for irrigation water. Therefore, as held in Ramawatar (supra) and keeping in view that alleged incident occurred way back in the year 2008; there is no further complaint of any untoward incident between parties; there is no ground to doubt that parties

¶10

have entered into compromise on their own will as well as that it is for the advancement of peace and harmony, the proceedings in Session Trial No. 0089 of 2009 (State of U.P. vs. Shivnarayan Dubey alias Dabbu and another), arising out of Case Crime No. 1760 of 2008, under Sections 452, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3(1)(x) SC/ST Act, Police Station Kotwali Orai, District Jalaun, are hereby quashed. The application is accordingly allowed.

¶11

Both parties are directed to deposit Rs. 1000/- each before High Court Legal Services Authority.

¶12

Order Date :- 28.11.2022/AK (Sl. No. 2 out of 310 fresh cases)

¶13

Digitally signed by AWADESH KUMAR Date: 2022.11.29 16:29:10 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shivnarayan Dubey @ Dabbu and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shivnarayan Dubey @ Dabbu and Another 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Kumar Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ishtakar and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Ram Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P.and Another

Jay Kumar Chaubey Vs State of U.P and Another

Pradeep Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P and Another