Allowed

Sarthak Goel v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC16 Aug 2022A482/602/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash charge-sheet and cognizance order in a Section 498-A IPC case. Mediation between parties succeeded, resulting in a settlement and agreement to withdraw pending cases, satisfying the Supreme Court's settled law for quashing.

What did the court decide?

Charge-sheet dated 21.08.2019 and cognizance order dated 04.10.2019 in Criminal Case No. 6974 of 2019 are quashed.

Sarthak Goel Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 602 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Sarthak Goel Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Lochan Shukla,Kaustubh Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mool Chandra Maurya

¶4

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶5

List revised.

¶6

Heard Sri Devesh Kumar Shukla, Advocate holding brief of Sri Kaustubh Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ankit Srivastava, learned counsel for the State and perused the records. Sri Mool Chandra Maurya, learned counsel for the private respondent is not present.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to allow the present application and quash the charge-sheet dated 21.08.2019 and the cognizance order dated 04.10.2019 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Etah as well as the prosecution of the applicant under Sections 498-A I.P.C. which is pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Etah as Criminal Case No. 6974 of 2019 (arising out of Crime No. 1293 of 2018), Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Etah (State Vs. Sarthak Goel). It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to stay the further proceeding of the aforesaid case, during the pendency of present application.

¶8

The matter was referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court vide order dated 07.01.2020 for making an effort between the parties for settling their disputes amicably.

¶9

As per report of Mediation Centre dated 24.03.2022 the parties have entered into settlement dated 24.03.2022 in view of Interim Settlements dated 30.09.2021 and 18.11.2021 and have amicably settled their dispute and further agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶10

As per the office report dated 03.08.2022 a report from the Mediation Centre of this Court is on record which states that mediation between the parties is successful.

¶11

From perusal of the report of Mediation Centre of this Court, it appears that in pursuance of the said order the mediation

¶12

proceedings were taken up which ended in a settlement dated 24.03.2022 between the parties and the Mediation succeeded. The parties have settled their grievances and even the dispute arising out in the present matter. The reference of the present case is in para no. 6 (i) of the final settlement between the parties so drawn before the Mediation Centre where they have agreed to withdraw the cases going on between them.

¶13

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶14

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the applicant.

¶15

The present application is allowed.

¶16

The proceedings charge-sheet dated 21.08.2019 and the cognizance order dated 04.10.2019 in the aforesaid case are hereby quashed.

¶17

Office is directed to communicate this order to the concerned court within two weeks from today.

¶18

Order Date :- 16.8.2022 AS Rathore

¶19

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶20

Digitally signed by ABHISHEK SINGH RATHOR Date: 2022.08.18 10:10:25 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sarthak Goel v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sarthak Goel v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

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

Govind Dixit and 02 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Vasant Ram and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Ram Prakash and 5 others Vs State of U.P. and another

Ghanshyam Jaiswal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gyan Chandra and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Chaudhary and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another