Disposed

Akshay Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Feb 2023A482/39101/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 376(B) IPC and D.P. Act arising from a case in Ghaziabad, holding that continuation serves no useful purpose due to a verified compromise deed dated 12.10.2022 between the applicant and the victim.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 802 of 2015 and the impugned order are quashed; application allowed.

Akshay Tyagi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39101 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Akshay Tyagi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J.

¶5

Sri Ajay Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicants has filed certified copy of the verification order dated 02.02.2023, and compromisedeed dated 12.10.2022 through supplementary affidavit, which reveals that parties have appeared before the concerned court and got the compromisedeed verified. The concerned court has also transmitted same documents before this Court.

¶6

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

¶7

This application has been moved with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Sessions Trial No. 802 of 2015 (State Versus Akshay Tyagi and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 408 of 2013, under Sections 498A, 323, 376 (B) I.P.C and Section 304 D.P. Act,Police Station - Mahila Thana, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court-1, Ghaziabad in light of compromise deed dated 12.10.2022 in between the applicants and the opposite party no. 2.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submits that parties settled the matter by way of compromise, copy of the report of verified compromise deed is filed today before the Court, hence proceeding and impugned order is liable to be quashed.

¶9

The attention of this Court has been drawn to the following judgements of the Apex Court:-

¶10

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

¶11

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677].

¶12

3. Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others ( 2008) 16 SCC 1.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

In the aforesaid cases, 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. and another, 2013 (83) ACC 278 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid

¶16

cases has been explained in detail.

¶17

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 would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned cases.

¶18

In view of the above, the proceedings of the aforesaid Case are hereby, quashed.

¶19

The application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶20

Order Date :- 23.2.2023 Vinod .

¶21

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

Akshay Tyagi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Akshay Tyagi 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohd Nadeem Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramji Pandey and 2 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Aman Kumar and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Raja Babu Vs State of U.P. and Another

Geeta Devi Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Suresh Bahadur Singh and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another