Allowed

Babloo @ Kaushl and 6 Others v. the State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC10 Feb 2023A482/17845/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quashed pending criminal appeal proceedings. The decision relies on Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise for cognitive/non-compoundable offences, noting the dispute was personal in nature and parties had verified the settlement before trial court.

What did the court decide?

Criminal appeal proceedings no. 127/2012 arising out of Case Crime No. 60/2003 under IPC Sections 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 are quashed.

Babloo @ Kaushl and 6 Others Vs the State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17845 of 2016

¶3

Applicant :- Babloo @ Kaushl And 6 Others Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant Shri. Mohit Kumar Singh and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.

¶6

Learned counsel for the applicant is relying on the judgement Ramgopal and Another Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Krishnappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka 2021 0 Supreme (SC) 529 in which it has been held that parties may enter into compromise even in appeal.

¶7

In this case parties have settled their dispute but after judgment by the Trial Court and when appeal is pending. It is a case under Section 147, 148, 323, 324, 504 and 506 I.P.C. which is personal in nature.

¶8

Attention of the Court has also been drawn to the following judgement of the Apex Court.

¶9

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. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab ( 2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶10

In the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and non compoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another, 2013 (83) ACC 278 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶11

Such cases are liable to be decided in the terms of compromise even they are not covered under Section 320 of the Cr.P.C.

¶12

Parties have already appeared before the concerned court which has verified the compromise on 11.11.2016. A copy of the order has been submitted through supplementary affidavit and the same is accepted.

¶13

Accordingly, this application is allowed.

¶14

The proceeding of criminal appeal no. 127/2012 arising out of Case Crime No. 60/2003, under Sections, 147, 148, 323, 324, 504, 506 of I.P.C., Police StationMundali district- Meerut, titled Babloo and 6 Others Versus State of U.P. pending in the court of Additional Session Judge, Court No. 11th, Meerut are hereby quashed.

¶15

Order Date :- 10.2.2023 Saurabh

¶16

Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD AZAD ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Babloo @ Kaushl and 6 Others v. the State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Babloo @ Kaushl and 6 Others v. the 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

Om Prakash Modi and 5 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Manoj Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nityanand Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and Another

A.N. Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Others

Vijay Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Prabhawati Devi and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another