Allowed

Gourab Verma and Others v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Jul 2023/4948/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash a non-bailable warrant in a matrimonial dispute involving Sections 498A IPC and DP Act. The court relied on a verified compromise between the parties and prevailing Supreme Court precedents to quash proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the impugned order dated 15.11.2022 issuing non-bailable warrant against the applicants.

Gourab Verma and Others Vs State of U.P Thru… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:45682

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4948 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Gourab Verma And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shambhunath Mishra,Anand Babu Dixit,Rajan Mishra,Umesh Chandra Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Hemant Kumar Pandey,Riyaz Ahmad

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicant 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 impugned order dated 15.11.2022, whereby nonbailable warrant has been issued against the applicants by learned Court of Special Additional CJM, CBI (Ayodhya Prakaram), Lucknow, under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act in Complaint Case No.9789 of 2022.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant as well as opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 19.05.2023 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 30.05.2023.

¶11

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

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and the impugned order dated 15.11.2022, whereby non-bailable warrant has been issued against the applicants by learned Court of Special Additional CJM, CBI (Ayodhya Prakaram), Lucknow, under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act in Complaint Case No.9789 of 2022 are hereby quashed.

¶15

Order Date :- 13.7.2023

¶16

Amit/-

¶17

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

Gourab Verma and Others v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gourab Verma and Others v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., 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