Allowed

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

Allahabad HC18 Sept 2023A482/29411/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash the summons order and entire proceedings of a complaint case involving Sections 498-A IPC and D.P. Act. The quashing was based on a genuine settlement and compromise agreement between the applicant and his spouse, facilitated by family members.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the summoning order dated 3.4.2021 and the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2542 of 2021 against the applicants.

Shahrukh Khan and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Domestic Violence | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:179303

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29411 of 2023 Applicant :- Shahrukh Khan And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Asad Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ambikesh Kumar Sharma Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶4

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

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ambikesh Kumar Sharma, learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the summoning order dated 3.4.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2542 of 2021 (Smt. Hina Khan Vs. Shahrukh Khan and others), under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Ijjatnagar, DistrictBareilly, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Bareilly.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party No. 2 is the wife of applicant No. 1 and applicant Nos. 2 to 7 are his family members and on account of matrimonial discord, instant criminal proceedings was instituted against the applicants, however with the intervention of the respected members of both the family and society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled all their disputes and differences and they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that a settlement-agreement dated 24.7.2023 has been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexue No. 5 to this application.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties and in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them, entire proceedings be quashed against the applicants.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has acknowledged the said compromise and in paragraphs- 6 and 7 of the affidavit, it has been stated that opposite party No. 2

¶11

do not want to further pursue the instant case and has further stated, on instructions, that she has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶12

Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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.

¶20

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.

¶21

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2542 of 2021 (Smt. Hina Khan Vs. Shahrukh Khan and others), under Sections 498-A, 323 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Ijjatnagar, District- Bareilly, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Bareilly, are hereby quashed.

¶22

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 18.9.2023 KU

¶24

Digitally signed by :- KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shahrukh Khan and 4 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

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

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