Allowed

Rakesh Kumar Dixit @ Rakesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Feb 2023A482/39810/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court on application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. quashed the criminal proceedings of Case No. 2127 of 2022 involving Sections 420 and 406 IPC. The quashing was based on a valid compromise deed dated 21.11.2022 executed by the parties out of free will, supported by trial court verification and citing relevant Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 2127 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No. 284 of 2022 under Sections 420, 406 IPC are quashed.

Rakesh Kumar Dixit @ Rakesh Kumar Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39810 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Rakesh Kumar Dixit @ Rakesh Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajeev Kumar Sharma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Saurabh Shukla

¶4

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record.

¶6

The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No. 2127 of 2022 (State Vs Rakesh Dikshit), arising out of Case Crime No. 284 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406 IPC, P.S. Rath, District Hamirpur including the charge sheet and cognizance order on the basis of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶7

The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably and in furtherance thereof, they have filed a compromise deed dated 21.11.2022 annexed as Annexure No. 4 to the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, this Court, vide order 12.0102023, has sent the said compromise deed to the trial court with a direction to get the same verified and submit a report.

¶8

Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably and they have filed compromise deed dated 21.11.2022 and the same has been verified by the trial Court, vide order dated 24.01.2023 supplied today by learned counsel for the applicant, which is taken on record of this case.

¶9

In the present case, the sections involved are Sections 406, 420 IPC.

¶10

In compliance of the aforesaid order, the court below has verified the contents and parties of the compromise deed to the extent that the parties and contents of the compromise deed are genuine and they have entered into the compromise by freewill.

¶11

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal

¶12

case.

¶13

Therefore, in view of the above and considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641 , the entire proceedings of Case No. Case No. 2127 of 2022 (State Vs Rakesh Dikshit), arising out of Case Crime No. 284 of 2022, under Sections 420, 406 IPC, P.S. Rath, District Hamirpur are hereby quashed.

¶14

Accordingly, the instant petition is allowed.

¶15

Order Date :- 3.2.2023 RavindraKSingh

¶16

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

Rakesh Kumar Dixit @ Rakesh Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rakesh Kumar Dixit @ Rakesh Kumar 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

Smt Gulshan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gopi @ Akash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smt. Vandana Yadav and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amarnath Sharma and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Mahendra Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ravi @ Dimple Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others