Allowed

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

Allahabad HC21 Jul 2023A482/19958/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allowed a quashing application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court observed that the applicants and the opposite party had reached a mutual settlement. Relying on settled judicial principles, the court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings and quashed the case.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Case No. 1294 of 2016 under Sections 447, 504, 506 IPC were quashed, and no coercive action was taken against the applicants.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:146168

¶2

Court No. - 87

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 19958 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Brijesh Shukla And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shashi Kant Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Babu Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Neeraj Tiwari,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ram Babu Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2.

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 1294 of 2016 (State Vs. Brijesh Shukla And Others), under Sections- 447, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Kydganj, District- Allahabad , pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. Vth, Allahabad.

¶8

The case was heard on 26.05.2023 and the Court has passed the following order:-

¶9

"1. List revised.

¶10

2. Sri Ram Babu Tiwari, Advocate appears on behalf of the opposite party no.2 and states that he shall be filing his Vakalatnama in the office within four days.

¶11

3. Heard Sri Shashi Kant Shukla, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ram Babu Tiwari, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Sri B.B. Upadhyay, learned State counsel and perused the record.

¶12

4. The present application has been filed by the applicants- Brijesh Shukla, Shubham and Smt. Uma Tripathi with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Case No. 1294 of 2016 (State Vs. Brijesh Shukla & others) arising out of Case Crime No. 69 of 2015, under Sections 447, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kydganj, District Allahabad pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. V, Allahabad with a further prayer that proceedings of the aforesaid case be stayed against the applicants during the pendency of the present application.

¶13

5. Learned counsel for the applicants argued that the parties have entered into compromise which is dated 02.03.2019, copy of the said compromise is annexed as Annexure no.5 to the affidavit in support of present 482 Cr.P.C. application. It is argued that as such the present proceedings be quashed.

¶14

6. Looking to the facts of the case, it is provided that the applicants shall file the said compromise within a period of two weeks from today before the court concerned who shall verify the same within three weeks thereafter and send his report to this Court.

¶15

7. List on 21st July, 2023.

¶16

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

¶17

Pursuant to order dated 26.05.2023, compromise has been verified by the trial Court vide order dated 04.07.2023 and the same has been received to this Court from Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Allahabad vide letter dated 04.07.2023.

¶18

Learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 has not objected the aforesaid fact and submitted that in case proceedings is quashed, he would have no objection.

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

The present application is, accordingly allowed .

¶22

No order as to costs.

¶23

Order Date :- 21.7.2023 ADY

¶24

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

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Brijesh Shukla 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

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

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

Manoj Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Rohit and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. 2 Others

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

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

Raghvendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another