Allowed

Santosh Alias Santosh Gaur and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2023A482/26813/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this S. 482 Cr.P.C. application, the High Court quashed criminal proceedings for matrimonial offences arising from domestic discord. The court observed that the parties had amicably settled their disputes and recorded no objection to quashing, holding that prolonging the trial served no useful purpose.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Case No. 2597 of 2019 arising out of Crime No. 468 of 2017 were quashed.

Santosh Alias Santosh Gaur and 3 Others Vs State… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179978

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26813 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Santosh Alias Santosh Gaur And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Singh,Akhilesh Kumar Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Anish Kumar Sinha

¶6

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶7

Affidavit filed on behalf of opposite party No. 2 today in Court, is taken on record.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Anish Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 and perused the record.

¶9

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 1.3.2019 and cognizance order dated 8.4.2019 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 2597 of 2019 (State vs. Santosh Gaur and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 468 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Rudrapur, District- Deoria, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 11, Deoria.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party No. 2 is the wife of applicant No. 1 and sister in-law of applicant No. 2. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that on account of matrimonial discord, the present criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however, with the intervention of the respected members of both the family and society, they have amicably and genuinely settled all their disputes and differences and now they do not have any grievance against the each other.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to a compromise application dated 13.4.2023 supported by an affidavit, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure No. 4 to this application.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties and in order to

¶13

maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, entire proceedings be quashed against the applicants.

¶14

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit and in paragraph-7, the said compromise has been acknowledged. Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that the said compromise has taken place without any coercion, fear and undue influence. Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted, on instructions, that opposite party No. 2 has no objection if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶15

Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶16

This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of :-

¶17

1. B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another (2003) 4 SCC 675.

¶18

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677].

¶19

3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

Wherein 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.

¶23

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 case.

¶24

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 2597 of 2019 (State vs. Santosh Gaur and others) arising out of Case Crime No. 468 of 2017, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Rudrapur, District- Deoria, pending in the court of

¶25

Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 11, Deoria, are hereby quashed.

¶26

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.

¶27

Order Date :- 18.9.2023 KU

¶28

Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Santosh Alias Santosh Gaur and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Alias Santosh Gaur and 3 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

Smt Rekha Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anil Kumar @ Pappu Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Irshad Alias Irshad Ali Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Akhtar Ali and 3 Others Vs State of Up and Another

Laxman Singh and 9 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shahrukh Khan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another