Allowed

Haseeb Miyan and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2022A482/8102/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment grants a Section 482 CrPC application to quash criminal proceedings against the applicant. The court observed that a compromise was reached between the parties, rendering further proceedings unnecessary for a useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of S.T. No. 572/2018 arising u/s 323, 504, 308 IPC in Crime No. 402 of 2017 are quashed.

Haseeb Miyan and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8102 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Haseeb Miyan And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Aman Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Mishra-I,J.

¶5

Sri Suvansit Kumar Jaiswal, Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of the opposite party no.2, the same is taken on record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicants is permitted to make necessary correction in the prayer clause during course of the day.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Suvansit Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent and perused the record.

¶8

By way of the instant application, the applicant has sought quashment of the entire proceeding of S.T. No. 572/2018 (State vs. Haseeb Miyan and others) arising out of charge sheet dated 10.07.2017 in Case Crime No. 402 of 2017, under Sections - 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali, District - Bareilly.

¶9

It is contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that a worthy compromise has been reached between the parties and report to that extent regarding verification of the compromise deed has also been sent by the Incharge / Additional Session Judge, Court No.17, Bareilly, wherein fairness of the compromise entered into between the parties has been categorically stated. It is thus, argued that the continuance of the criminal proceedings against the applicant is bad in law. Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance in the matter reported as (2014) 6 SCC 466 in the matter of Narinder Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another in support of his contention.

¶10

It has been further added that if proceeding of the aforesaid case is allowed to go on then that will not result in conviction and possibility of conviction would become bleak. Therefore, proceedings in the aforesaid case initiated by opposite party no2. against the applicant is liable to be quashed in terms of the compromise between the parties.

¶11

Learned counsel for opposite party nos.2 and learned A.G.A. have no objection, if this application is allowed and the proceedings are quashed.

¶12

In view of the fact that the applicant and opposite party no.2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶13

Thus, in view of above, the entire proceeding of S.T. No. 572/2018 (State vs. Haseeb Miyan and others) arising out of charge sheet dated 10.07.2017 in Case Crime No. 402 of 2017, under Sections - 323, 504, 308 I.P.C., Police Station - Kotwali, District - Bareilly, is hereby quashed.

¶14

Accordingly, the present application is allowed .

¶15

Order Date :- 21.7.2022 S Rawat

¶16

Digitally signed by SHOBHIT RAWAT Date: 2022.07.23 13:45:00 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Haseeb Miyan and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Haseeb Miyan and 3 Others 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

Saurabh Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Bahadur Yadav and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt Shabana Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Kamlesh Kumar Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dhanna @ Dhanraj and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Shailendra Agarwal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another