Allowed

Raj Kapoor and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC22 Sept 2023A482/30988/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings. The court held that since the parties had amicably settled their matrimonial disputes and obtained a mutual consent decree pending divorce, further proceedings were no longer useful.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Case No. 18260 of 2023 under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act were quashed.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:184072

¶2

Court No. - 86

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30988 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Raj Kapoor And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashwani Singh,Saurabh Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶6

Shri Pankaj Mishra, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama along with counter affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 today in Court, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Pankaj Mishra, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that applicant no.1 is the husband, whereas applicant no.2 is the mother-in-law of opposite party no.2 and on account of matrimonial discord, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants, however subsequently, with the intervention of respected members of both the family and the society, the parties have amicably and genuinely settled their all disputes and differences and now, they do not have any grievance against each other.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has next drawn the attention of the Court to the settlement agreement dated 01.07.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 4 to this application.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that as per the settlement agreement, the parties have decided to live separately and a petition filed under Section 13-B of the Hindu Marriage Act with mutual consent, is pending before the court below.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the said settlement agreement, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶12

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed counter affidavit and in para 12 of the said affidavit, said settlement agreement has been acknowledged. Further in para 14, it has been stated that

¶13

opposite party no.2 has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶14

Learned AGA could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, (2008) 16 SCC 1. (iv). Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2012) 10 SCC 303. (v). Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466.

¶19

Wherein Hon'ble 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, law expounded by Hon'ble 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 learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the present case.

¶21

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 18260 of 2023 (State Vs. Raj Kapoor and Another), arising out of Case Crime No. 97 of 2022, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Agra, pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate/ Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/ F.T.C.-1st, Agra, are hereby quashed.

¶22

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.

¶23

Order Date :- 22.9.2023 Nadim

¶24

Digitally signed by :- NADIM ALAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Raj Kapoor and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raj Kapoor 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

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

Sandeep Chaturvedi and 2 Othesr Vs State of U.P. and Another

Naresh Chaudhary Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Ankit Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Pappu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another