Allowed

Amar Nath Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC26 May 2023A482/27683/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings instituted under Sections 500, 504, and 506 IPC. The court relied on a reported settlement between the parties and cited Supreme Court precedents to end the case to avoid wasting time.

What did the court decide?

Quashed the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 441 of 2007 instituted under Sections 500, 504, 506 IPC.

Amar Nath Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:118001

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 27683 of 2007

¶4

Applicant :- Amar Nath Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Surendra Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Anurodh Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Heard Mr. Surendra Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 Mr. Anurodh Tripathi.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by applicants to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No.441 of 2007 (previously registered as Case No.1813 of 2006), under Sections 500, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra and summoning order dated 16.08.2007 passed by 1st Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Magistrate, Sonbhadra on the basis of compromise.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the parties have entered into compromise and the same has been filed before the court below in compliance of order dated 21.04.2023 passed by this Court and the court below has verified the same vide order dated 08.05.2023, copy of the same has been placed on record. He has further submitted that since parties have settled the dispute, opposite party no.2 also does not want to proceed with trial, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

¶9

On the other hand, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, he has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed.

¶10

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

¶11

The Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions, viz., Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder

¶12

Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶13

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid, the Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed .

¶15

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No.441 of 2007 (previously registered as Case No.1813 of 2006), under Sections 500, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Robertsganj, District Sonbhadra are hereby quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 26.5.2023 Ajeet

¶17

Digitally signed by :- AJEET KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Amar Nath Singh and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Amar Nath Singh and Another 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

Nikhil Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Vishal Verma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Suraj Tiwari and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Awadhraj Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Radhey Shyam Vs State of U.P.

Krishan Pal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others