Allowed

Smt. Rakhi Kumari and Another v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC8 Feb 2023A482/39844/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment allows an applicant to quash criminal proceedings in a matrimonial dispute involving charges of rape and POCSO. The court held that since the parties had settled the matter via a compromise deed, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial, citing Supreme Court precedents allowing compromise even in cognizable offences.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of the Special Sessions Trial No.74 of 2018 (State Vs. Dinesh Kumar Gaud) are quashed.

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

¶1

Court No. - 72

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 39844 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Rakhi Kumari And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Vivek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶6

This application has been moved with the prayer to set aside the order dated 31.08.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Sonbhadra in Special Sessions Trial No.74 of 2018 (State Vs. Dinesh Kumar Gaud), under Sections 376, 313 IPC and Section 5(J)(II)/6 SC/ST Act, Police Station Chopan, District Sonbhadra.

¶7

It is a case under Section 376, 313 IPC and Section 5(J)(II)/6 POCSO Act in which the applicant no.1 is victim and applicant no.2 Dinesh Kumar Gaud is accused. They have solemnized marriage. A copy of the marriage registration certificate as well as photocopy of the photos of marriage ceremony have been annexed as annexure-3 to the affidavit file in support of this application. Marriage between both the applicants has also been registered on 02.12.2021 in District Sonbhadra. Out of the Wedlock a girl child namely Suman has also been born who is in the lap of applicant no.2. Both the applicants are present in person in the Court. Learned counsel for the applicants has also produced original marriage certificate. Its copy has also been annexed with the file.

¶8

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that since the parties have settled the matter by way of compromise, copy of the report of verified compromise deed has been placed 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 cases has been explained in detail.

¶16

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.

¶17

The application is, accordingly, allowed.

¶18

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

¶19

Order Date :- 8.2.2023 Shahroz

¶20

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

Smt. Rakhi Kumari and Another v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Rakhi Kumari and Another v. State of U.P.

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

Sheshnath and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shivpujan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Irfan and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Yadav Alias Rajendra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Makbool Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hukumdar Vs State of U.P. and Another