Allowed

Prempal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Jan 2023A482/38037/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court quashed criminal proceedings in a complaint case involving a neighbor dispute over a wall demolition where parties amicably settled their differences and filed a compromise application citing precedent on compromise in cognizable offences.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 31 of 2022 under Sections 452, 308, 325, 504, 506 IPC are quashed.

Prempal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38037 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Prempal And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Suneel Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pramod Kumar Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

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

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 16.08.2022 and entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 31 of 2022 (Sher Singh Vs. Prempal and Others), under Sections 452, 308, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Shahabad, District Rampur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)/ F.T.C., Rampur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants and the opposite party no.2 are next door neighbours and on account of sudden quarrel over demolition of wall of opposite party no.2 by the buffalo of the applicants, the instant criminal case was instituted against the applicants. The police thoroughly investigated the matter and after collecting the cogent material, did not find any offence to be made out against the applicants and as such, submitted the final report dated 03.12.2019. Consequent to the said final report, opposite party no.2 filed a protest petition. The said protest petition has been treated as a complaint. Thereafter, after recording the statements of the witnesses under Sections 200 and 202 CrPC, the applicant has been summoned vide order dated 16.08.2022.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that during the pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, since there was trivial dispute between the parties, they have amicably settled their all disputes and differences in order to maintain harmonious and cordial relations between them and now, they do not have any grievance against each other and a compromise application dated 06.10.2022, supported by an affidavit, has also been drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 5 to this application.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the aforesaid compromise and to give quietus to the instant case, the entire proceedings be quashed.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also appeared and has filed an affidavit on behalf of opposite party no.2 as well as two injured witnesses, in which, all of them has categorically stated that dispute between the parties has amicably been settled and in order to maintain cordial and harmonious relations, they do not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings and has no objection, if the same are quashed.

¶11

This Court is not unmindful of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 , 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 the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶12

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 above mentioned case.

¶13

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 31 of 2022 (Sher Singh Vs. Prempal and Others), under Sections 452, 308, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Shahabad, District Rampur, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)/ F.T.C., Rampur, are hereby quashed.

¶14

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed.

¶15

Order Date :- 27.1.2023 Nadim

¶16

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

Prempal and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prempal and 3 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

Rinkesh Prajapati Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shanti Ben Jaswant Lal Patel Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Shaheen Akhatar Vs State of U.P. and 5 Others

Mohammad Asif Ansari Vs State of U.P. and Another

Aman Soni and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

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