Allowed

Salim Husain v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC5 Mar 2022A482/7010/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the court quashed criminal proceedings involving sections 498A and 323 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute. The judgment held that since the parties had reconciled and entered a verified compromise, continuation of proceedings would be futile.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings in case no.237 of 2019 crime no.568 of 2018 were quashed.

Salim Husain Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 91 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7010 of 2020 Applicant :- Salim Husain Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Sharan Tomar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bipin Pal Singh,Sanjay Srivastava

¶2

Hon'ble Syed Aftab Husain Rizvi,J.

¶3

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

¶4

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceeding as well as summoning order dated 25.10.2019 case no.237 of 2019 in crime no.568 of 2018 under sections 498A, 323 IPC & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali, District Rampur pending in the court of ACJM-I, Rampur.

¶5

The opposite party no.2 lodged an FIR in sections 498A, 323, 313 IPC Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Kotwali District Rampur against the applicant. After submission of charge-sheet, learned Magistrate has taken cognizance.

¶6

It is submitted that during the course of proceedings, the parties have reconciled their differences and the compromise has been entered between them which has been produced in writing. The opposite party no.2 has filed a short counter affidavit and have acknowledged the aforesaid facts. Vide order dated 20.02.2020 parties were directed to appear before the court below and permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise deed. In compliance of the aforesaid order, the parties have appeared before the court below and the court below has verified the compromise vide order dated 30.07.2020 which has been filed by the applicant as annexure SA-I, supplementary affidavit dated 05.08.2021. Both the parties are agreed that in terms of the compromise the proceeding of case be terminated and the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶7

Matter is related to matrimonial dispute and both the parties have entered into amicable settlement. The fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsels for the parties.

¶8

A three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303, has observed that: (SCC p.340, para 58).

¶9

"58. Where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor."

¶10

Where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties. [Vide: Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692].

¶11

Keeping in mind the position of law and facts, circumstances of the case, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed .

¶12

The entire proceedings relating to aforementioned case is hereby quashed.

¶13

The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

¶14

The party shall file computer generated copy of such order download from the official website of High Court Allahabad or certified copy issued from the Registry of the High Court, Allahabad.

¶15

The concerned Court/Authority/Official shall verify the authenticity of such computerized copy of the order from the official website of High Court Allahabad and shall make a declaration of such verification in writing.

¶16

Order Date :- 5.3.2022 C. MANI

¶17

Digitally signed by CHANDRAMANI VERMA Date: 2022.03.07 10:26:46 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Salim Husain v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Salim Husain v. State of U.P. and Anr.

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

Shareef Ahmad @ Shareef Kuraishi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Zaki Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Vs State of U.P. and Another

Prabhu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Imtiyaz Vs State of U.P. and Another