The applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings and conviction under a settlement verified by the appellate court. Citing Pramod, the court allowed the application, set aside the conviction, and declared the appeal infructuous.
Conviction order set aside; application to quash proceedings allowed; appeal declared infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 90
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7448 of 2022
Applicant :- Mata Ambar Gupta And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Chandra Pal Singh,Mridul Mishra
Hon'ble Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.
Supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the applicants in Court today, is taken on record.
Heard Mr. Pankaj Kumar Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants and learned learned A.G.A. for the State.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the entire proceeding of Case Crime No.72 of 1998 (State Vs. Matambar Gupta and others), under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Meja, District-Allahabad and the consequential conviction order dated 27.11.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.10, Allahabad in Criminal Case No.1210 of 2004 (State Vs. Matambar Gupta and others) as well as the proceeding in Criminal Appeal No.195 of 2019, (State Vs. Matambar Gupta and others), pending in the Court of Additional District Judge, Court No.3, Allahabad.
This court vide order dated 15.7.2022 in the present application has observed that the learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance upon the judgment of this Court passed in Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in 2021 0 Supreme (All) 87 compromise has been verified between the informant and the accused-applicants.
Learned counsel for the applicants submits that joint affidavit has been filed before the appellate court by both the parties (they are in total numbers of eight persons), alongwith the compromise deed, the copy thereof is filed alongwith the supplementary affidavit dated 28.08.2022. He further submits that compromise has been verified by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 3, Allahabad on 08.08.2022, the certified copy of the order-sheet has been filed alongwith the supplementary affidavit. The offence in question under sections 323 and 504 IPC are compoundable and only section 506 IPC is non compoundable.
In the light of these peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the parties have entered into amicably settlement and the appellate Court has verified the compromise which includes all the affected parties in the case.
Consequently, the present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. liable to be decided in terms of compromise which has been verified by the court concerned and in the light of judgment of this Court Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in 2021 0 Supreme (All) 87. The judgment of conviction and sentenced passed in case crime no. 72 of 1998 (State Vs. Matambar Gupta and Others), passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 10, Allahabad on 27.11.2019 convicted the applicants under sections 323, 504, 506 IPC is set aside in terms of the aforesaid compromise, the appeal preferred by the accused-applicants against the aforesaid judgment and order is rendered infructous and shall be declared, so by the appellate court.
The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. is disposed of in the manner.
Order Date :- 21.9.2022 Vikram
Digitally signed by VIKRAM SINGH Date: 2022.09.26 13:38:18 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings and conviction should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. in light of a verified compromise between parties.
Whether the pending appeal by the accused-applicants should be declared infructuous following the compromise.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and AnotherReferred¶8
Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in 2021 0 Supreme (All) 87
Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and AnotherReferred¶11
Pramod And Another Vs. State of U.P. and Another, reported in 2021 0 Supreme (All) 87
Mata Ambar Gupta and 2 Others
Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
