Allowed

Ashif v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Jul 2022A482/871/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act upon verification of a compromise deed between the applicant and the State, holding that no useful purpose is served by prolonging the trial after dispute settlement.

What did the court decide?

Quashed charge sheet no.622/2020, cognizance order dated 20.10.2020, and entire proceedings of Case No.2224 of 2020.

Ashif Vs State of U.P. and Another — Child Custody and Guardianship | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 81

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 871 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ashif Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Ayub Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Mohd. Ayub, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Lal Ji Maurya, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application has been moved with the prayer to quash the charge sheet no.622 of 2020 dated 09.09.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 20.10.2020 and the entire proceeding of Case No.2224 of 2020 (State Vs. Ashif), arising out of Case Crime No. 413 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.-Tajganj, District-Agra, pending in the Court of Special Judge, POCSO Act, Agra.

¶7

On 21.02.2022, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard learned Counsel for the applicant as well as learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of charge sheet No.622 of 2020 dated 9.9.2020(State vs. Aashif) as well as entire proceeding of Case No.2224 of 2020(State vs.Ashif) arising out of Case Crime No.413 of 2020 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tajganj,District Agra.

¶10

It has been stated that the parties have amicably settled their disputes and have entered into the compromise. The compromise deed has been annexed as Annexure 10 to this application.

¶11

The applicant shall file an application along with the compromise deed before the concerned Court below within 15 days for verification of the compromise. On receiving the said application the Court below shall take steps for verification of the compromise, within 15 days from date of receiving application and compromise, and shall prepare a report. The parties on filing a suitable application shall also be given a certified copy of the report.

¶12

Put up as fresh on 30.3.2022 before appropriate Bench, on which date, the applicant shall file the report of the concerned Court regarding the verification of the compromise.

¶13

Till the next date of listing, no coercive action shall be taken against applicant in Case No.2224 of 2020(State vs.Ashif) arising out of Case Crime No.413 of 2020 under Section 363, 366, 376 IPC and 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Tajganj,District Agra.

¶14

This case shall not be treated as tied up/part heard to this Bench."

¶15

In compliance of the aforesaid order dated 21.02.2022, the Court concerned has verified the compromise between the parties in the presence of the parties and their respective counsels vide order dated 05.03.2022, copy of the same has been annexed with the supplementary affidavit.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. for the State also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and the copy of the same has also been enclosed along with verification order dated 05.03.2022, he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶18

This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

¶19

B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,

¶20

Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677 ,

¶21

Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,

¶22

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,

¶23

Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

¶24

In the aforesaid judgments, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs. State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶25

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already

¶26

settled their dispute.

¶27

Accordingly, the proceedings of charge sheet no.622 of 2020 dated 09.09.2020 as well as cognizance order dated 20.10.2020 and the entire proceeding of Case No.2224 of 2020 (State Vs. Ashif), arising out of Case Crime No. 413 of 2020, under Sections 363, 366, 376 I.P.C. & 3/4 POCSO Act, P.S.-Tajganj, District-Agra, pending in the Court of Special Judge, POCSO Act, Agra, are hereby quashed.

¶28

The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

It is always open to the parties to approach this Court, in case, the verification has been done by playing fraud.

¶30

Order Date :- 22.7.2022 Rahul.

¶31

Digitally signed by RAHUL GOSWAMI Date: 2022.07.25 14:41:21 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashif v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashif 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

Brajesh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ritesh Sonkar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Surendra Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Chandra Mohanty Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Kumar Deepak and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Patel Alias Dinesh Vs State of U.P.and Another