Allowed

Ashutosh Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, C Block, Lok Bhawan Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Jul 2023/6852/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings arising from a complaint involving sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and the D.P. Act. The court allowed the application based on a mutual compromise between parties, holding that further proceedings would serve no useful purpose. The impugned charge-sheet and summoning order were also quashed.

What did the court decide?

The application and proceedings under Case No. 96 of 2018, along with the convn summoning order and charge-sheet, were quashed.

Ashutosh Dwivedi Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47216

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6852 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ashutosh Dwivedi Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home, C Block, Lok Bhawan Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nadeem Murtaza,Akanksha Bajpayee Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Vakalatnama filed by Shri J.S. Walia and Sri Jeet Bahadur, Advocates on behalf of the opposite party No.2 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, 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 proceedings and consequential proceedings of Case No.96 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.395 of 2017, P.S.Hasanganj, Lucknow U/s 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act and for quashing the impugned summoning order dated 23.01.2018 in Case No.96 of 2018 as well as impugned charge-sheet dated 14.12.2017 and to stay consequential proceedings of Case No.96 of 2018.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 11.05.2023 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

¶11

court below vide report dated 07.07.2023.

¶12

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.

¶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 proceedings and consequential proceedings of Case No.96 of 2018 arising out of Case Crime No.395 of 2017, P.S.- Hasanganj, Lucknow U/s 323, 504, 506, 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act as well as impugned summoning order dated 23.01.2018 in Case No.96 of 2018 and impugned chargesheet dated 14.12.2017 are hereby quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 18.7.2023 Arpan

¶17

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

Ashutosh Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, C Block, Lok Bhawan Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh Dwivedi v. State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home, C Block, Lok Bhawan 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

Smt. Neha Srivastava Proprietor N v System Gorakhpur Vs the State of U.P. and Anr.

Suleman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Mata Prasad Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Kalaam Mohammad Nafees and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

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

Rishikesh Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt. Lko and Another