Allowed

Gyan Singh and Another v. State of U.P and Another

Allahabad HC3 Mar 2023A482/30235/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed criminal proceedings in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2019 arising from a case involving IPC and Arms Act offences. Relying on previous judgments, the court held that the verified compromise between parties rendered further proceedings unnecessary and allowed the application under Section 482 CrPC.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Session Trial No.57 of 2019 under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 34 IPC and Section 25 Arms Act are quashed in light of the compromise.

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

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30235 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Gyan Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ran Jeet Singh,Chandra Jeet Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Short counter affidavit filed by Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Yadav, Advocate on behalf of opposite party no.2 in Court today, is taken on record. Office is directed to register the same.

¶6

Heard Mr. Ran Jeet Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Mr. Pankaj Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶7

On 17.10.2022, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A.

¶9

By means of the present application, the prayer sought by learned counsel for the applicants is to quash the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.57 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.171 of 2018 under sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station-Poonch, District-Jhansi in the light of the compromise dated 09.09.2022 arrived between the parties.

¶10

Submission made by learned counsel for the applicant is that parties have come to terms outside the Court and they have jotted down the compromise deed on 09.09.2022, which is annexed as annexure-7 to the application and signed by Madhuri Sharan(injured), Gyna Singh and Rahul.

¶11

Under the circumstances, the applicant may approach the court concerned on or before 10.11.2022 along with the present compromise and the learned court concerned shall pass suitable order after hearing the contesting parties and identifying them.

¶12

After passing of the order by the court below, learned counsel for the applicant shall file certified copy of the order by way of supplementary affidavit.

¶13

Let notice be issued to opposite party no.2 through learned A.C.J.M. concerned to appear herself or engage some counsel for appearance by the next date.

¶14

Put up this case as fresh on 28.11.2022 before appropriate Court.

¶15

Meanwhile, no coercive action shall be taken in Sessions Trial No.57 of 2019 arising out of case crime no.171 of 2018 under sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 34 IPC and Section 25 of Arms Act, Police Station-Poonch, District-Jhansi. "

¶16

In compliance of the aforesaid order, the compromise between the parties have been verified by order dated 24.11.2022 in the presence of parties along with their respective counsels. Certified copy of the order dated 24.11.2022 has been passed to the Court today, is kept on record.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, therefore, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶18

Learned A.G.A. for the State also accepts that the parties have entered into a compromise and the certified copy of the order by which compromise has been verified passed on to the Court by learned counsel for the applicants, he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶19

This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

¶20

B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,

¶21

Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation; (2008) 9 SCC 677 ,

¶22

Manoj Sharma Vs. State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC 1,

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

In the aforesaid judgments, 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. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC 278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶26

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 criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶27

Accordingly, the proceedings of Session Trial No.57 of 2019 (State Vs. Gyan Singh & others), arising out of Case Crime No.171 of 2018, under Sections 452, 323, 324, 504, 506, 307, 34 I.P.C. & Section 25 Arms Act, P.S.-Poonch, District-Jhansi, in the light of compromise dated 09.09.2022, are hereby quashed.

¶28

The application is, accordingly, allowed . There shall be no order as to costs.

¶29

It is always open to the parties to approach this Court, in case, the verification has been done by playing fraud.

¶30

Order Date :- 3.3.2023 Rahul.

¶31

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Gyan Singh and Another v. State of U.P and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gyan 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Dixit Vs State of U.P. and Another

Krishna Kant Tiwari and 3 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Sanjay Chawala and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Arif Hashmi @ Aditya Arya Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Mobeena and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Laik Ahmad Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another