Allowed

Sirazul Hasan and 15 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Oct 2023A482/33002/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings. The parties had settled their dispute through a court-verified compromise. Since injuries were simple and no x-ray was done, the respondent had no objection to quashing. The proceedings were quashed as no useful purpose would be served.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings (charge sheet, cognizance order, and criminal case) were hereby quashed.

Sirazul Hasan and 15 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:195550

¶2

Court No. - 89

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33002 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Sirazul Hasan And 15 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd Zubair Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abdul Momin,Saddam Husain

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit, filed today, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants; learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge sheet dated 01.01.2020; cognizance order dated 04.11.2020 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Case No.9276 of 2020 (State Vs. Sirazul Hasan and others) arising out of Case Crime No.126 of 2019, under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 I.P.C., P.S. Hathgaon, District Fatehpur, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 4, Fatehpur.

¶9

Counsel for the applicants submits that both the parties lodged F.I.R. against each other and in one of the F.I.R., parties have settled dispute out of the court and entered into a compromise and on that account, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 09.12.2022 directed the parties to appear before the court below and file the compromise, thereafter the concerned court shall verify the compromise deed and transmit the same to this Court.

¶10

Pursuant to the said order dated 09.12.2022, the parties appeared before the court below and in their presence, after due verification of the contents of the compromise made between the parties, order dated 06.02.2023 has been passed by the court below verifying the said compromise. A copy of the same is annexed as Annexure-6 to the application.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicant and opposite party no.2 have settled their private and civil dispute through compromise and as such opposite party no.2

¶12

does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicant. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶13

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that injuries are simple in nature and no x-ray was done and opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶14

In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, the applicants and opposite party no. 2 do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them. The matter has been mutually settled between the parties, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶15

Thus in view of the well settled principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the matters of Krishnappa & Ors. vs. State of Karnataka; 2021 0 Supreme(SC) 529, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur and Ors. vs. State of Gujarat and another; 2017 9 SCC 641, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana; 2003(4) SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Burea of Investigation and another; (2008) 9 Supreme Court Cases 677, Gian Singh Vs. Stated of Punjab; (2012) 10 SCC 303 and Narinder Singh & others Vs. State of Punjab and another; (2014) Supreme Today 642, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶16

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed .

¶17

Order Date :- 11.10.2023 Meenu Singh

¶18

Digitally signed by :- MEENU SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sirazul Hasan and 15 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sirazul Hasan and 15 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

Shailesh Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Nawab @ Nabbu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Saheel @ Sushil Ahmad Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Sanjay Rajput and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shiva @ Shivendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vishnu Thakur Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others