Allowed

Ashish Udaar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Mar 2023A482/18296/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings under sections 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act following a verified compromise. The Court approved the compromise report from the trial court and allowed the application to quash the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of proceedings in Criminal Case No. 219 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 0076 of 2018 under sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act.

Ashish Udaar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18296 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Ashish Udaar And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Srivastava,Shailesh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Kumar Srivastava

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶6

The case is taken up in the revised call.

¶7

Heard Shailesh Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State. None appears even in the revised call to press this application on behalf of opposite party.

¶8

This application has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of the Criminal Case No. 219 of 2021 (State Vs. Ashish Udaar) arising out of Case Crime No. 0076 of 2018, under sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Baghpat pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track Court, District Baghpat.

¶9

On 20.07.2022, the following order was passed:-

¶10

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶11

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed praying for quashing of entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 219 of 2021 (State Vs. Ashish Udaar), arising out of Case Crime No. 0076 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Baghpat, pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast Track Court, Baghpat.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the charge sheet has been issued, the parties have reconciled their differences and a compromise has been entered between them which has been reduced in writing.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the correctness of the compromise.

¶14

Accordingly, it is provided that the parties shall appear before the court below along with a certified copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and pass an appropriate order with respect to the verification within a period of two months from today. Upon due verification, the court below may pass appropriate order in that regard and send a report to this Court.

¶15

List after two months.

¶16

Till then no coercive measure shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."

¶17

In compliance of the aforesaid order the report regarding verification of compromise received from Civil Judge Junior Division, FTC, Baghpat has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 17.02.2023. A letter of Civil Judge Junior Division, FTC, Baghpat has been placed on record along with order dated 29.08.2022 vide which the compromise has been verified in the presence of parties and their respective counsels.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. for the State also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat , reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶27

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 criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶28

Accordingly, the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 219 of 2021 (State Vs. Ashish Udaar) arising out of Case Crime No. 0076 of 2018, under sections 498A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Baghpat pending in the court of learned Civil Judge (Junior Division), Fast

¶29

Track Court, District Baghpat. on the basis of compromise are hereby quashed.

¶30

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

¶31

Order Date :- 29.3.2023 Arti

¶32

Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashish Udaar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashish Udaar 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd Imran and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sonu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Abhishek Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anshuman Garg and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rinku Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another