Quashed

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

Allahabad HC3 Jan 2023A482/40088/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

An applicant filed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings instituted under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC. The court noted that the disputes arose from matrimonial discord but have since been amicably settled. Upon confirmation of settlement and restoration of relations, the court held that no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings and q

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings of Case No. 154 of 2019 including the summoning order dated 25.09.2019 were quashed. No order as to costs.

Shamim and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 65

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 40088 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Shamim And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shiv Shanker Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Upendra Vikram Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned AGA for the State, Shri Shailesh Kumar Tripathi, Advocate holding brief of Shri Upendra Vikram Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the summoning order dated 25.09.2019 and entire proceedings of Case No. 154 of 2019 (State Vs. Shamim and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Auraiya, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/ F.T.C. (Offence committed against Women), Auraiya.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that instant case was instituted against the applicants on account of matrimonial discord, however, with the intervention of the respected members of both the family, applicants and the opposite party no.2 have amicably settled all their disputes and differences in order to maintain cordial and harmonious relations between them and they have restored their relationship and have no grievance left against each other and are living peacefully.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants has next submitted that in view of the compromise made between the parties, entire proceedings be quashed.

¶9

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has also acknowledged the fact that the dispute has already been compromised between the parties and they have restored their relationship and are living peacefully as husband and wife.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, on instructions, has made a statement at the bar that

¶11

opposite party no.2 does not want to further pursue the criminal proceedings against the applicants and she has no objection, if the entire proceedings are quashed.

¶12

This Court is not unmindful of the judgements of the Apex Court in the cases of:-

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

Wherein 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, law expounded by Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶19

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by the 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.

¶20

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No. 154 of 2019 (State Vs. Shamim and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 27 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Auraiya, pending in the court of Civil Judge (Jr. Div.)/ F.T.C. (Offence committed against Women), Auraiya, are hereby quashed.

¶21

This application under Section 482 CrPC is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶22

Order Date :- 3.1.2023 Nadim

¶23

Digitally signed by NADIM ALAM Date: 2023.01.04 17:55:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

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

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamim 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

Vidit Agarwal Vs State of U.P. and Another

Smabhu Nath Ojha Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Devendra Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sukkhu Ram Vs State of U.P and Another

Shivmurat Ram and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Brajesh Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another