Allowed

Yaseen and 3 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Allahabad HC9 Aug 2023A482/11546/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings arising from an IPC complaint. The trial court secured a verification report from the facts that a valid compromise had been entered between the applicants and the prosecution, leading the court to quash the case.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the criminal proceedings of Case No. 1394 of 2014 (State vs. Yasin and others).

Yaseen and 3 Others Vs State of U.P.and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:161086

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11546 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Yaseen And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P.And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohammad Rizwan Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rohit Nandan Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

The present application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Case No. 1394 of 2014 (State vs. Yasin and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 465 of 2012, under Sections 323, 504, 308 IPC, P.S. Ghatampur, District -Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Additional District Judge/F.T.C.-IInd, Kanpur Nagar as well as charge sheet dated 20.12.2012 and cognizance order dated 27.04.2013.

¶8

The case was heard on 17.05.2022 and Court has passed the following order:-

¶9

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed for quashing the proceedings of Case No. 1394 of 2014 (State Vs. Yasin and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 465 of 2012 under Sections 323, 504, 308 I.P.C. Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar pending before learned Additional District Judge/F.T.C. IInd Kanpur Nagar as well as to quash the charge sheet dated 20.12.2022 filed in the aforesaid case.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the charge sheet has been issued, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing.

¶12

Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of two months from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.

¶13

List after two months.

¶14

Till then no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case. "

¶15

In compliance of order of this Court dated 17.05.2022, Additional District and Sessions Judge, F.T.C., Kanpur Dehat has submitted its report dated 22.07.2022 verifying the compromise entered between the parties.

¶16

Learned counsel for applicants submitted that parties have entered into compromise and no dispute is remain between the parties as on date. Therefore, in light of compromise, present proceeding may be quashed.

¶17

Learned counsels for opposite parties have not disputed the aforesaid facts and submitted that in case present proceeding is quashed, he would have no objection.

¶18

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶19

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677 , Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642 , the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶20

The present application is, accordingly allowed .

¶21

No order as to costs.

¶22

Order Date :- 9.8.2023 Sartaj

¶23

Digitally signed by :- SARTAJ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Yaseen and 3 Others v. State of U.P.and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yaseen and 3 Others 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

Mukesh Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rachana Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mohammad Waseem Khan Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Rajveer Singh Bedi Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Bihari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Bihari Vs State of U.P. and Another