Allowed

Neeraj Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Apr 2023A482/3077/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the applicant's application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings. Relying on compensatory exceptions recognized in Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that since the dispute between private parties was settled, no useful purpose would be served in continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 772 of 2009 are quashed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3077 of 2021 Applicant :- Neeraj Gupta Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vindeshwari Prasad Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Arvind Kumar Sahu

¶2

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶3

Heard Sri Vindeshwari Prashad, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 for the State.

¶4

On 07.02.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶5

"Sri Vindeshwari Prasad, learned counsel for applicant and Sri Arvind Kumar Sahu, learned counsel for private respondent are present.

¶6

It is jointly submitted by learned counsel for the parties that they have entered into a compromise, in relation to Criminal Case No. 772 of 2009, pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Varanasi, (State vs. Neeraj Gupta) arising out of chargesheet dated 20.01.2002 in Crim No. 149 of 2001/20 of 02, under Sections 394, 120-B, 411 IPC, Police Station-Singara, District-Varanasi.

¶7

In view of such facts, parties are directed to appear before the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IIIrd, Varanasi on 08.09.2021 for verification of compromise, for which no separate notices will be required. If compromise is verified, learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate to furnish his report by 18.09.2021.

¶8

List this matter thereafter on 22.09.2021.

¶9

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicant."

¶10

In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise verification report received from learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, is kept on record as is evidence from office report dated 22.09.2021. A letter of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, dated 13.09.2021 has been placed along with compromise deed as well as order dated 08.09.2021 vide which the compromise has been verified by the Court below in presence of parties along with their respective counsels.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. for the State also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, he has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶13

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

¶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; 4. Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303; and 5. Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab; ( 2014) 6 SCC 466,

¶17

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.

¶18

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.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶20

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.772 of 2009 (State Vs. Neeraj Gupta), arising out of Case Crime No.20 of 2020, under sections 394, 120-B and 411 I.P.C. Police Station- Singara, District Varanasi pending in the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Third Varanasi on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed .

¶21

The application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶22

Order Date :- 19.4.2023 Imtiyaz

¶23

Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Neeraj Gupta v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Neeraj Gupta 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

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Om Prakhash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Robin Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Arjun Raikwar and Another Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Sukhvir Vs State of U.P.