Allowed

Manish Goyal and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Allahabad HC27 Oct 2023/1510/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge-sheet and criminal case proceedings following a verified settlement and compromise between the applicant and the opposite party.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; Impugned charge-sheet dated 17.12.2015 in Crl. Case No.2686 of 2016 and proceedings of said case are quashed.

Manish Goyal and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Anr. — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:70294

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1510 of 2018

¶4

Applicant :- Manish Goyal And Anr. Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr. Counsel for Applicant :- Shesh Narain Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Kunwar Mukul Rakesh,Kunwar Sushant Prakash

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned charge-sheet dated 17.12.2015 in Crl. Case No.2686 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No.491-A of 2008 U/s 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police Station- Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow and proceedings of Crl. Case No.2686 of 2016.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 28.05.2018 a direction was given to the Senior Registrar of this Court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, Senior Registrar has verified the contents of compromise.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no.2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the Senior Registrar vide report/order dated 29.05.2018.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by Senior Registrar of this Court.

¶11

Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶12

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶13

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and the impugned charge-sheet dated 17.12.2015 in Crl. Case No.2686 of 2016 arising out of Case Crime No.491-A of 2008 U/s 323, 504, 506, 325 I.P.C., Police Station- Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow and proceedings of Crl. Case No.2686 of 2016 are hereby quashed .

¶14

Office is directed to communicate this order to concerned authority, forthwith.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.10.2023 Arpan

¶16

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Manish Goyal and Anr. v. State of U.P. and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Goyal and Anr. 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

Dharm Raj Verma Vs State of U.P Thru Secy Home Lko and Anr.

Vishok Kumar Vs the State of U.P and Ors.

Mohammad Arif Azad Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Altaf Khan Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Mukhtar Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Others

Mishrilal Lodhi Vs State of U.P. Trhu. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others