Allowed

Anand Pal Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC13 Mar 2023A482/17852/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This application under Section 482 CrPC sought to quash criminal proceedings involving Sections 498-A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act. Relying on a verified compromise between the parties which ended the matrimonial dispute, the Court quashed the complaint case and summoning orders.

What did the court decide?

Complaint Case No. 4741 of 2018 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act is quashed. No coercive steps to be taken against applicants pending verification.

Anand Pal Singh and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17852 of 2019

¶3

Applicant :- Anand Pal Singh And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Kumar Srivastava,Punita Pandey,Shweta Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Deepankar Chaudhary

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and Mr. Deepankar Chaudhary, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as perused the materials on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 02.07.2018 and Revisional Court/ Session Judge, Amroha order dated 26.03.2019 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 4741 of 2018 (Smt. Rekha Vs. Anand Pal and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar (Amroha).

¶7

On 08.12.2022, the Court has passed following order:

¶8

"Heard Ms. Shweta Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Deepankar Chaudhary, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, Sri Suresh Bahadur Singh, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.

¶9

The instant application has been moved on behalf of the applicants to quash the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 4741 of 2018 as well as summoning order dated 02.07.2018 and order dated 26.03.2019, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha) pending in the court Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar (Amroha) on the basis of compromise executed between the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted present dispute is purely matrimonial dispute and earlier the instant matter was referred to mediation center of this Court but before the mediation, mediation proceedings failed and parties could not arrived at any settlement but thereafter both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and in this regard a compromise has also been executed between them. Therefore, the compromise executed between the parties may be verified by the court below.

¶11

He next submitted that applicants are ready to appear before the court concerned for verification of the compromise executed between them on

¶12

the date fixed by this Court.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party no.2 also conceded the fact that both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and opposite parties no.2 is also ready to appear before the court concerned for verification of compromise.

¶14

Learned AGA is having no objection if any such direction is given to the court below for verification of compromise executed between the parties.

¶15

As both the parties have amicably settled their dispute and compromise has also been executed between them, therefore, it is directed that both the parties shall appear before the court concerned within two weeks and shall file an application along with the certified copy of this order for verification of compromise executed between them.

¶16

If any such application is moved, then the court below shall verify the compromise alleged to have been executed between the parties, in accordance with law, and shall transmit verification report to this Court.

¶17

List this case on 16.01.2023.

¶18

Office is directed to submit a report on the next date in respect of verification report, if any, forwarded by the court below.

¶19

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."

¶20

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-2 vide order dated 23.12.2022 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division)/F.T.C.-2 vide order dated 23.12.2022 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure no. S.A.1 to the supplementary affidavit dated 05.03.2023 and 03.03.2022 respectively.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been verified by the concerned Judge, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case are liable to be quashed.

¶22

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶23

This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

¶24

B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another ; (2003)4 SCC 675,

¶25

Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation ; (2008) 9 SCC 677,

¶26

Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others ; (2008) 16 SCC 1,

¶27

Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab ; (2012); 10 SCC 303,

¶28

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

¶29

In the aforesaid judgments, 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. & Another ; 2013 (83) ACC 278 . in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶30

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose shall be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned complaint case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶31

Accordingly, the proceeding of Complaint Case No. 4741 of 2018 (Smt. Rekha Vs. Anand Pal and Others), under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District J.P. Nagar (Amroha), pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, J.P. Nagar (Amroha) are hereby quashed.

¶32

The application is, accordingly, allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶33

Order Date :- 13.3.2023 SK Srivastava

¶34

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

Anand Pal Singh and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anand Pal Singh and 4 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

Sanjay and 3 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Anjali Sonker Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sami Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sachin and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Manbhawati Vs State of U.P. and Another

Radhey Shyam Vs State of U.P. and Another