Allowed

Sanjay v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC4 Jan 2023A482/29665/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the court quashed proceedings instituted for offences under the IPC arising from matrimonial discord. The court observed that a settlement agreement had been executed by the parties, who wished to amicably resolve differences. Relying on Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise in certain cases, the court held that prolonging proceedings served no u

What did the court decide?

Quashing of cognizance/summoning order, charge sheet and entire criminal proceedings involving the applicant.

Sanjay Vs State of U.P. and Another — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29665 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Sanjay Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State, Sri Shiv Sharan Tripathi, learned counsel for the first informant and perused the record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 12.10.2021 and charge sheet No. 01 of 2021 dated 6.9.2021 as well as entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10645 of 2021 (State Vs. Sanjay) arising out of Case Crime No. 524 of 2021, under Sections 323, 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Modi Nagar, DistrictGhaziabad, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ghaziabad.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that opposite party No. 2 is the brother in-law of the applicant and on account of matrimonial discord, the present criminal proceedings was instituted against the applicant, however with the intervention of the respected members of both the families, they have amicably settled all their disputes and differences.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that a settlement-agreement dated 26.5.2022 has been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexue No. 4 to this application.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant has next submitted that in order to maintain cordial and harmonious relations between them, the entire criminal proceedings be quashed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed counter affidavit acknowledging the compromise dated 26.5.2022 made between the parties and in para- 4 and 5 of the said affidavit, it has been stated that in view of the compromise, he does not want to further pursue the case and has no objection if the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶12

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

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 10645 of 2021 (State Vs. Sanjay) arising out of Case Crime No. 524 of 2021, under Sections 323, 406, 506 IPC, P.S. Modi Nagar, District- Ghaziabad, pending in the court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 5, Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.

¶21

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶22

Order Date :- 4.1.2023 KU

¶23

Digitally signed by KALIM UDDIN SIDDIQUI Date: 2023.01.04 19:18:57 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sanjay v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay 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

Sukkhu Ram Vs State of U.P and Another

Shivmurat Ram and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shamim and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokendra and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramvir @ Ramvir Sharma Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another