Allowed

Smt. Kusuma Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Feb 2023A482/3470/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court allowed Smt. Kusuma Devi’s Section 482 CrPC application to quash criminal proceedings. It held that since parties settled the civil nature dispute and no conviction was likely, continuing the trial was futile and against interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings in Case No.12802 of 2019 arising out of Crime No.31 of 2019 are quashed.

Smt. Kusuma Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 51

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3470 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Kusuma Devi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sudhakar Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ganesh Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Vikram D. Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Ganesh Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Case No.12802 of 2019, State Vs. Vijay Lal Kushwaha and others, arising out of Case Crime No.31 of 2019, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 120B, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. Panki, District Kanpur Nagar pending in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar as well as charge sheet dated 13.4.2019 and summoning order dated 30.4.2019.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 12.12.2022 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 16.12.2022 , therefore, the present case be finally decided.

¶8

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed.

¶9

Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.

¶10

Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a civil nature dispute and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be

¶11

prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.

¶12

It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.

¶13

In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 12.12.2022, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶14

Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688 , the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.

¶15

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed.

¶16

Order Date :- 16.2.2023 Bhaskar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- BHASKAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Smt. Kusuma Devi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kusuma Devi and 2 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

Abdul Kalam Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shaila Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satyendra Kumar Sharma @ Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Milan Alias Milan and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Param Veer and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rohit and 2 Othera Vs State of U.P. and Another