Allowed

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC18 Apr 2023A482/40055/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of criminal proceedings for offences under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 IPC, the High Court accepted a verified compromise between the parties. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging proceedings post-settlement and quashed the entire criminal case and charge sheet

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7940 of 2021 and the impugned charge sheet dated 11.11.2020 were quashed. There shall be no order as to costs.

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40055 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan And 8 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Dev Mishra,Ram Niwas Mishra,Ramanuj Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri Krishna Dev Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Akhilesh Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Shashi Kant Mishra, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ramanuj Tripathi, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7940 of 2021, 'State v. Qamar Ahmad alias Guddan and others', as well as impugned charge sheet dated 11.11.2020, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 IPC, P.S. Banna Devi, District Aligarh, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh.

¶7

On 05.12.2022, following order has been passed by this Court:

¶8

"Mr. Ramanuj Tripathi, learned counsel filed short counter affidavit along with Vakalatnama on behalf of O.P. No. 2, is taken on record.

¶9

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the O.P. No. 2 as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶10

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 7940 of 2021 (State Vs. Qamar Ahmad alias Guddan and others) as well as charge-sheet dated 11.11.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 587 of 2020, under sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 IPC, Police Station Banna Devi, District Aligarh pending in the court of C.J.M., Aligarh.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that parties have settled the matter amicably and have entered into a compromise. Learned counsel for the applicants prays that compromise be verified and matter be disposed of accordingly.

¶12

Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, it is directed that parties shall appear before the trial court within three weeks and the trial court after proper identification will verify the compromise on the same day and will submit the report to this Court before the next date of listing.

¶13

List this case on 4.1.2023 as fresh. Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants in the aforesaid case."

¶14

In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise was verified by order dated 06.01.2023 but two injured persons, namely, Bilal and Sajub were not present before the concerned court for verification, therefore, the Court on 13.03.2023 passed the following order:

¶15

"In compliance of earlier order dated 05.12.2022, though the compromise has been verified by order dated 06.01.2023 but the two injured persons namely, Bilal and Sajub were not present before the concerned Court.

¶16

In view of the above, it is directed that the aforesaid persons shall appear before the Court concerned along with their respective counsels and with a copy of this order on the next date fixed and be permitted to file an application for verification of the original compromise document. It is expected that the trial court may fix a date for the verification of the compromise and after ensuring the presence of parties, pass an appropriate order with respect to the same in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible. While passing the order verifying the compromise, the concerned court shall also record the statements of the aforesaid persons as to whether all the terms and conditions mentioned in the original compromise deed, so filed, have been fulfilled or not. Upon due verification of compromise, the Court below shall send its report to this Court.

¶17

Put up as fresh on 03.04.2023.

¶18

Till then, no coercive action shall be taken against the applicants."

¶19

In compliance of the aforesaid order, a report from the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh regarding compromise verification report has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 17.04.2023.

¶20

The letter of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh dated 01.04.2023 has been placed along with the order dated 01.04.2023, wherein the statements of injured Bilal and Sajub have been recorded and compromise has been verified in the presence of parties along with their respective counsel.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that on account of compromise entered into between the parties concerned, all disputes between them have come to an end, and therefore, further proceedings against the applicants in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶22

Learned A.G.A. does not dispute the aforesaid fact and submitted at the Bar that since the parties concerned have settled their dispute as mentioned above, therefore, he has no objection in quashing the impugned criminal proceedings against the applicants.

¶23

Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief

¶24

reference to the following cases:-

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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

¶30

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.

¶31

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 criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶32

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 7940 of 2021, 'State v. Qamar Ahmad alias Guddan and others', as well as impugned charge sheet dated 11.11.2020, under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506, 452, 325 IPC, P.S. Banna Devi, District Aligarh, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh, are hereby quashed.

¶33

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

¶34

A copy of this order be certified to the lower court forthwith.

¶35

Order Date :- 18.4.2023 DS

¶36

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

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Qamar Ahmad @ Guddan and 8 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

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

Deepam Gupta and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Bansal Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Om Prakhash Vs State of U.P. and Another

Himmu Patel @ Har Prasad Vs State of U.P. and Another