Allowed

Rishipal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Apr 2023A482/37023/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Aftabpur Nagar Bench, quashed criminal proceedings initiated under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The court relied on a verified compromise by the parties in the trial court regarding charges of cheating, forgery, and conspiracy, deeming further litigation unnecessary.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of case No. 13725 of 2022 pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur. No order as to costs.

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

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37023 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rishipal And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pawan Singh Pundir Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State as well as perused the materials on record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the proceeding of Case No.13725 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Rishipal and another) arising out of Case Crime No.350 of 2021, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC, Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur pending in the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur.

¶7

On 21.11.2022, the Court has passed following order:

¶8

"Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.G.A. for the State. Perused the record.

¶9

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking the quashing the proceeding of Case No.13725 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Rishipal and another) arising out of Case Crime No.350 of 2021, under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC, Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur.

¶10

The submission of learned counsel for the applicants is that through good offices of certain well-meaning persons the parties have amicably settled the dispute among themselves and have mutually compromised in the matter. According to the counsel there is no dispute left out any more in between the parties and they wish no more litigation in between them.

¶11

The contention of the counsel for the applicants is that as the opp. parties are not interested to pursue the matter pending in the lower court and is not inclined to give any evidence against the accused, the acquittal of the accused-applicants is now a foregone conclusion. It shall be a sheer abuse of the court's process, if the proceedings going on in the lower court are still allowed to go on further. Submission therefore is that in the wake of the inter-se compromise arrived at in between the

¶12

parties, the impugned proceedings ought to be quashed.

¶13

Let compromise, if any, be filed before trial court, where it shall be verified in presence of both sides and after its verification, certified copy of compromise along with verification report of trial court concerned, be filed on record of this Court, by way of supplementary affidavit.

¶14

List this case on 16th December, 2022 as fresh.

¶15

The further proceedings of the aforesaid case shall remain stayed till the next date of listing with regard to the applicants."

¶16

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur vide order dated 05.12.2022 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur vide order dated 05.12.2022 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure no. 1 of the supplementary affidavit.

¶17

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been verified by the concerned Magistrate, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case are liable to be quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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 . in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶25

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 case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶26

Accordingly, the proceeding of Case No.13725 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Rishipal and another) arising out of Case Crime No.350 of 2021, under Section 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 506 IPC, Police Station- Sadar Bazar, District- Saharanpur pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saharanpur are hereby quashed.

¶27

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

¶28

Order Date :- 11.4.2023 Anurag/-

¶29

Digitally signed by :- ANURAG JAISWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rishipal and Another v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rishipal 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

Ajay Yadav @ Pintu and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravindra Nath Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Satish @ Satish Pal and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Munendra and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Vinod Rajpoot and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunita Agarwal and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another