Partly allowed

Arshad(Husband and 5 Others) v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Feb 2023A482/12599/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The single judge allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings arising from Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and the Dowry Prohibition Act, relying on a verified compromise between the parties and settled apex court precedents.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case No. 1929 of 2019 and all consequential proceedings are quashed.

Arshad(Husband and 5 Others) Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 77

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12599 of 2020

¶3

Applicant :- Arshad(Husband And 5 Others) Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pankaj Bharti Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Ms. Nand Prabha Shukla,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to allow this application and quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1929 of 2019 (State vs. Arshad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 260 of 2019 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC, and section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mirapur, District Muzaffar Nagar and all its consequential proceedings on the basis of compromise between the parties dated 07.10.2020.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants argued that it is common ground between the parties that the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of court. Learned counsel for the applicants has placed SA-1 to the affidavit in support of this application, which is copy of compromise dated 07.10.2020. It is argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter pending in the lower court and is not inclined to give any evidence against the applicants and, therefore, the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties.

¶8

Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 admits the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and states that he has no objection if the impugned proceeding pending against the applicants is quashed.

¶9

In the supplementary affidavit, the factum of compromise is also stated to have been entered into between the parties and has been verified by Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Court No. 4, Muzaffarnagar dated 16.05.2022. The verification report is part of the record.

¶10

The law with regard to quashing of a case on the basis of

¶11

settlement arrived between the parties, is well settled.

¶12

The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶13

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the entire proceedings, the charge sheet and all consequential proceedings as prayed for by the applicants.

¶14

The present application u/ 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed .

¶15

The proceedings of Case No. 1929 of 2019 (State vs. Arshad and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 260 of 2019 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC, and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mirapur, District Muzaffar Nagar, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 3, Muzaffar Nagar are hereby quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 22.2.2023 Shivani

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SHIVANI SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arshad(Husband and 5 Others) v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arshad(Husband and 5 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

Murari Yadav Alias Murari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mainuddin Vs State of U.P. and Another

Badri @ Rakesh Sharma and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shikendar Singh and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saif Ahmad and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Riyaz Ahmad and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another