Allowed

Arun and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Apr 2023A482/12713/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of criminal proceedings following a verified compromise. The court, noting the non-heinous nature of the offense and the terms of the settlement, held that continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process and would cause unnecessary harassment. Consequently, the entire proceedings were quashed.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7485 of 2017 are quashed. An entry is made in the police station GD regarding Case No. 14261 of 2017. The order is to be communicated within a week.

Arun and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 12713 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Arun And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sunil Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ashish Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

In compliance with the orders of this Court dated 12.04.2023, a report from the Incharge Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Agra dated 18.04.2023 has been received, reporting a verification of the compromise by all parties. Along with the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate's report, a copy of the order verifying the compromise and a copy of the compromise have also been annexed.

¶6

This application has been filed seeking to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7485 of 2017 State of U.P. vs. Arun and others (arising out of Case Crime No. 622 of 2016), under Sections 323, 324, 504, IPC, P.S. Etmaddaula, District Agra pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7 Agra as well as the summoning order dated 11.05.2017.

¶7

Heard Mr. Gaurav Kulshreshta, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Sunil Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, , Mr. Asish Kumar, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and the learned AGA appearing on behalf of the State.

¶8

A perusal of the terms of the compromise shows that the parties have entered into a compromise and in terms thereof, they do not want to pursue the prosecution any further.

¶9

Looking to the nature of the allegation, it is evident that the offence is not heinous and one, where the State through formally the forerunner of the prosecution, may object.

¶10

Learned AGA states that looking to the nature of the allegation and the fact that the offence is not heinous, the Court may pass appropriate orders, as considers fit.

¶11

Looking to the nature of the injuries, offence charged, the nature of allegations and over all circumstances as well as the the terms of the compromise, this Court finds that no useful purpose would be served by permitting this prosecution to continue, which would be an abuse of process of Court. Rather, it would only involve avoidable expenditure of resources, time and energy in holding a trial, the result whereof is obvious. It would also result in harassment of the parties. In the circumstances, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.

¶12

In the result, this application succeeds and allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7485 of 2017 State of U.P. vs. Arun and others (arising out of Case Crime No. 622 of 2016), under Sections 323, 324, 504, IPC, P.S. Etmaddaula, District Agra pending in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 7, Agra, are hereby quashed .

¶13

An entry shall be made in the GD of the police station Etmaddaula, District Agra, to the effect that proceedings of Criminal Case No. 14261 of 2017 (renumbered as 2075 of 2017) State of U.P. vs. Virendra Singh and others (arising out of Case Crime No. 36 of 2017), under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Etmaddaula, District Agra pending

¶14

in the Court of the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 2, Agra, have been quashed under orders of this Court. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra shall ensure compliance of this part of the order at the police station concerned.

¶15

Let this order be communicated to the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra through the learned Sessions Judge, Agra and the S.H.O., P.S. Etmaddaula, District Agra through the S.S.P., Agra by the Registrar (Compliance) within a week.

¶16

Order Date :- 20.4.2023 Deepak

¶17

Digitally signed by :- DEEPAK KUMAR PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Arun and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun and 2 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Zia Ur Rehman Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dinesh Pal Alias Dinesh Kumar Pal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiv Chandar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs Laxmi Narayan and Others

Ramit Jain and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Virendra Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another