Allowed

Piyush Kumar Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2023A482/17746/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings under IPC Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, and 506 initiated by Mahesh Chandra Agrawal against Piyush Kumar Gupta. The court relied on prior Apex Court precedents and allowed the quashing due to a verified mutal settlement between applicants and victims.

What did the court decide?

The application to quash the said criminal proceeding and summoning order is allowed.

Piyush Kumar Gupta and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146528

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17746 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Piyush Kumar Gupta And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Gopal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ghanshyam Das Mishra

¶5

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ghanshyam Das Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 6373 of 2019 (now case No. 2063 of 2022) (Mahesh Chandra Agrawal Vs. Piyush Kumar Gupta and another) under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Prem Nagar, DistrictBareilly.

¶8

The case was heard on 12.05.2023 and the Court has passed the following order:-

¶9

"Vakalatnama filed by Dr. G.S.D. Mishra on behalf of opposite party no. 2 is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Dr. G.S.D. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.

¶11

The instant application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 13.12.2019 as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 6373 of 2019 (now Case No. 2062 of 2022) (Mahesh Chandra Agrawal vs. Piyush Kumar Gupta and another) under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Prem Nagar, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 8, Bareilly.

¶12

Learned counsel for the parties submits that the matter has been settled between the parties amicably and compromise deed has been filed which is on record as Annexure-7 to the affidavit. For verification of the compromise, parties are directed to appear before the court concerned within three weeks. The court concerned shall verify the compromise and shall send its report on or before the next date.

¶13

List this case on 04.07.2023 as fresh along with Application u/s 482 No.

¶14

16171 of 2023. In the meantime, NBW dated 13.2.2023 shall remain in abeyance.

¶15

When the matter is listed next the name of Dr. G.S.D. Mishra be shown as counsel for the opposite party no. 2."

¶16

Pursuant to order dated 12.05.2023, trial Court verified the compromise vide on 15.06.2023 and the same has been received to this Court from In-Charge Judicial Magistrate, IInd, Bareilly vide letter dated 15.06.2023.

¶17

Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has not objected the aforesaid fact and submitted that in case proceeding against the applicants 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 reported in 2003(4) SCC 675 (B.S. Joshi) Vs. State of Haryana) as well as the judgement of the Apex Court reported in J.T. 2008(() SC 192 (Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and another) , as well as judgment of the Apex Court reported in (2012) 10 SCC 303 (Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab) and reported in (2014) Supreme Today 642 (Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another), 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 :- 24.7.2023 ADY

¶23

Digitally signed by :- AMAR DEEP YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Piyush Kumar Gupta and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Piyush Kumar Gupta and Another 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

Manas Kalra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Rubey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brijesh Shukla and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lalit Mohan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nandani and 7 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vaibhav Patil Vs State of U.P. and Another