Allowed

Mohd. Javed Haneef v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023/4894/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a charge-sheet and summoning order, the High Court allowed the plea. The court accepted that a compromise was effected between the parties and verified by the lower court, holding that no useful purpose would be served in proceeding further.

What did the court decide?

Charge-sheet No.814 of 2018 dated 24.11.2018 and summoning order dated 13.02.2019 were quashed.

Mohd. Javed Haneef Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:46006

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4894 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Javed Haneef Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijyant Nigam,Vishnu Pratap Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ashish David Rao, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party No.2 is taken on record.

¶7

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.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet No.814 of 2018, dated 24.11.2018 filed in Case Crime No.769 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri as well as summoning order dated 13.02.2019 passed in Criminal Case No.620 of 2019.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant as well as opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 17.03.2023 a direction was given to the court below to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned court below had verified the contents of compromise.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court below vide report dated 11.04.2023.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been

¶12

verified by the court below.

¶13

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.

¶14

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.

¶15

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and charge-sheet No.814 of 2018, dated 24.11.2018 filed in Case Crime No.769 of 2018, under Sections 419, 420, 406, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Sadar, District Kheri as well as summoning order dated 13.02.2019 passed in Criminal Case No.620 of 2019 are hereby quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 13.7.2023

¶17

Amit/-

¶18

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

Mohd. Javed Haneef v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Javed Haneef v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Civil Secrtt. Lko. 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

Ankit Sharma @ Ankit Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Lko. and Another

Master X Thru. Its His Father Sri Raghav Ram Mishr Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Uma Shankar Prasad and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. U.P. and Another

Shaikh Shad and Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home and Another

Mohammad Ateek Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another