Allowed¶11

Shambhu Nath Prasad v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Apr 2022A482/40675/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise between parties; FIR dated 27.05.2010 and charge sheet dated 09.07.2010; Case No. 3638 of 2010, State Vs. Ram Govind Prasad (Sarraf) and others; Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC (cheating and forgery); PS Ubhaon, District Ballia; compromise verified by Court below vide report dated 31.03.2022 following order dated 22.02.2022; reliance on B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana 2003(4) SCC 675 and Nikhil Merchant Vs. CBI J.T. 2008(9) SC 192; Shambhu Nath Prasad v. State of U.P.; High Court of Judicature at Allahabad; Gautam Chowdhary, J.; order dated 21.4.2022.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet dated 09.07.2010 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 set aside pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties. ¶11

Shambhu Nath Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2022)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Charge sheet dated 09.07.2010 and the entire proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 set aside pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 [State Vs. Ram Govind Prasad (Sarraf) and others] under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., the order dated 02.12.2011, the FIR dated 27.05.2010 and the charge sheet dated 09.07.2010 are liable to be quashed pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties. +1 more

¶6

Court's answer

In view of the well settled principles of law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana (2003(4) SCC 675) and Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another (J.T., 2008(9) SC 192), the charge sheet as well as the proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 are set aside.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

Since the parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled between them, with the compromise verified by the concerned Court below vide its report dated 31.03.2022, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Gautam Chowdhary, J.) allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 [State Vs. Ram Govind Prasad (Sarraf) and others] under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. (PS Ubhaon, District Ballia), pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Vth/Incharge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia, together with the order dated 02.12.2011, the FIR dated 27.05.2010 and the charge sheet dated 09.07.2010. Noting that the dispute arose out of a private dispute between the applicant and opposite party no. 2, that the parties had resolved their differences, that opposite party no. 2 did not wish to press charges, and that the compromise had been verified by the Court below vide report dated 31.03.2022 pursuant to this Court's order dated 22.02.2022, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further. Relying on B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675 and Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another, J.T. 2008(9) SC 192, the Court set aside the charge sheet and the proceedings of the case. Application allowed; order dated 21.4.2022.

¶1

Court No. - 86

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40675 of 2011

¶3

Applicant :- Shambhu Nath Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- O.P. Gupta,Mr.M.D. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt.Advocate

¶4

Hon'ble Gautam Chowdhary,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶6

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No. 3638 of 2010 [State Vs. Ram Govind Prasad (Sarraf) and others], under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., PS Ubhaon, District Ballia, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Vth/ Incharge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ballia as well as order dated 02.12.2011 passed in the aforesaid case and to quash the first information report dated 27.05.2010 and charge sheet dated 09.07.2010, pursuant to the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the present dispute arises out of private dispute between the applicant and the opposite party no. 2. The present criminal case has been lodged against the applicant but that no real criminal offence had actually occurred. It is thus submitted that the present criminal prosecution has been lodged by the opposite party no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the parties, with passage of time they have been able to resolve their differences. He further submits, at present, the opposite party no. 2 does not wish to press charge against the applicant. He next submits that vide order dated 22.02.2022, this Court had sent the matter for verification of the compromise before the Court below and the learned Court below has verified the same vide its report dated 31.03.2022, therefore the proceedings against the applicants may be quashed.

¶8

In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and as the matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise, which has also been verified by the concerned Court below, vide its report dated 31.03.2022, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶9

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S.

¶10

Joshi Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in J.T., 2008(9) SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another), the charge sheet as well as proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby set aside.

¶11

The present application is accordingly allowed. Order Date :- 21.4.2022 AKT

¶12

Digitally signed by ASHOK KUMAR TRIPATHI Date: 2022.04.26 11:15:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shambhu Nath Prasad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shambhu Nath Prasad v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Kushnuma Bano Vs State of U.P. through its Principal Secretary Home U.P. and another

Monika Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Arun Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kailash Singh Vs State of Up through Principal Secretary Home Lko and another

Bablu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sabir Ali @ Bade Munna and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another