Allowed

Roop Chand and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Oct 2023A482/22013/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. where the applicant and opposite parties settled their dispute out of court. Finding the chance of conviction bleak post-compromise, the court held continuation of prosecution would be a futile exercise and allowed quashing in the interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of Case No. 640/IX/2021 against applicants are quashed and the application is allowed.

Roop Chand and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:189991

¶2

Court No. - 88

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22013 of 2021

¶4

Applicant :- Roop Chand And 6 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mahipal Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shailendra Kumar Ojha

¶5

Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.

¶6

1-Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party No.1, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and perused the record with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.

¶7

2-This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants to quash the charge sheet No.134/2021 dated 24.05.2021, cognizance order dated 16.06.2021 and proceedings of Case No. 640/IX/2021 (State Vs. Roop Chand and others) arising out of Case Crime No.80 of 2021, under Sections 147, 420, 120-B, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station-Chhata, District-Mathura, pending in the Court of learned judicial Magistrate, Chhata, DistrictMathura.

¶8

3-Filtering out unnecessary details, the basic facts, which are necessary for disposal of this case as argued by the learned counsel for the applicants are that vide order of coordinate Bench of this Court dated 09.05.2022, interim protection was granted to the applicants till the next date of listing with the direction that no coercive action shall be taken against them. During pendency of this application parties concerned have settled their dispute outside the Court and a compromise application dated 15.09.2023 has been filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Chhata, District-Mathura. The certified copy of the said compromise application has been brought on record by means of a joint afÏdavit of applicants and opposite party no.2 dated 18.09.2023 as Annexure No.1.

¶9

4-In Paragraph No. 7 of the aforesaid joint afÏdavit dated 18.09.2023, it is mentioned that on account of compromise arrived at between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, therefore continuance of criminal proceedings pursuant to impugned charge-sheet against the applicants after compromise between them would be a futile exercise and the same is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶10

5-Learned Additional Government Advocate as well as learned counsel appearing on behalf of opposite party No.2 do not dispute the aforesaid facts. Learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 has also submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, opposite party No.2 has no grievance and objection if the Court quashes the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

¶11

6-After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties, I find that after compromise/settlement arrived at between the parties in the present case, the chance of ultimate conviction is bleak and therefore, no useful purpose is likely to be served by allowing criminal prosecution against the applicants to continue, as the same would be a futile exercise and a sheer wastage of precious time of the Court. The continuation of a criminal proceedings after compromise would cause oppression and prejudice to the parties concerned. If the parties concerned wants to bury the hatchet and are willing to move on in personal dispute on the basis of compromise, they may be allowed to compound the offences in terms of settlement, because in such circumstances the proceedings can hardly be taken to their logical culmination and, the prospect of conviction gets lost.

¶12

7-Considering the facts and circumstances of the case in the light of dictum and guidelines laid down by the Apex Court in case of Nikhil Merchant vs Central Bureau of Investigation, 2008 (9) SCC 677 , Manoj Sharma vs State and others, 2008

¶13

(16) SCC 1 , Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641 and State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others AIR 2019 SC 1296 this Court feels that this is a fit case, where this Court can exercise its inherent power to secure the end of justice. In the case in hand interest of justice would be met, if the prayer of parties is acceded to and the criminal proceedings and other litigation between the parties is brought to an end.

¶14

8-In view of the above, entire proceedings of Case No. 640/IX/2021 (State Vs. Roop Chand and others) against the applicants are hereby quashed.

¶15

9-The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in terms of compromise as mentioned above.

¶16

Order Date :- 3.10.2023 Kashifa

¶17

Digitally signed by :- KASHIFA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Roop Chand and 6 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Roop Chand and 6 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

Dr. Virendra Kumar @ B. Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Radhey Shyam Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Nisha Gupta Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vipin and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ajay Singh Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Farman and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another