Allowed

Abhishek v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC29 Mar 2023A482/41192/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 CrPC application, the Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings initiated under the DP Act and IPC sections involving the applicant and the State. The quashing was based on a valid compromise deed verified by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar, with the State having no objection.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings of Misc. Case No. 877 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No. 736 of 2019 under relevant IPC sections and 3/4 D.P. Act were quashed.

Abhishek Vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41192 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Abhishek Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dushyant Singh,M.C. Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mayank Yadav,Vivek Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Mr. Dushyant Singh, learned counsel for the applicant, Ms. Sindhuja Rathi Bhargava, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Vivek Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party and Mr. Akhilesh Kumar Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶6

This application has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceedings of Misc. Case No. 877 of 2021, State Vs. Abhishek, Case Crime No. 736 of 2019, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 325, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar as the parties have entered into compromise.

¶7

On 21.02.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Supplementary affidavit filed by learned Counsel for the applicant is taken on record.

¶9

Heard Sri Dushyant Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant, learned Standing Counsel for the State and Ms. Sindhuja Rathi, Advocate holding brief of Sri V.K. Singh, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2.

¶10

It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the applicant that a compromise has taken place between the parties and by the said compromise, parties have resolved their dispute amicably. It has been further informed that the aforesaid compromise has been filed before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar on 16.2.2023.

¶11

Both the Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant as well as opposite party no.2, on instructions, informed the Court that their respective clients will appear before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar on 02.03.2023.

¶12

In view of such facts, in case, the parties appear before the court concerned, the CJM, Bulandshahar after verifying the compromise deed will submit its

¶13

report before this Court within a period of three weeks thereafter.

¶14

Put up this case as fresh on 29.3.2023 before the appropriate Court.

¶15

As an interim measure, it is provided that till the next date of listing, further proceedings of Misc. Case No.877 of 2021 (State Vs. Abhishek) arising out of Case Crime No.736 of 2019, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504,325, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Kotwali Dehat, District-Bulandshahar shall remain stayed.

¶16

In case, the parties do not appear before the court below on the date fixed or the compromise is not found valid, the effect and operation of this order shall stand vacated automatically. "

¶17

In compliance of the aforesaid order the report regarding verification of compromise received from Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar has been placed on record as is evident from the office report dated 29.03.2023. A letter of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar dated 15.03.2023 been placed on record along with compromise deed as well as order dated 02.03.2023 vide which the compromise has been verified in the presence of parties and their respective counsels.

¶18

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that since the compromise entered between the parties has been verified by the court below, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case may be quashed by this Court.

¶19

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party also accept that the parties have entered into a compromise and he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶20

This Court is not unmindful of the following judgements of the Apex Court:

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State of Gujarat , reported in 2022 SCC Online SC 936 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶27

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.

¶28

Accordingly, the proceedings of Case No. 877 of 2021, State Vs. Abhishek, Case Crime No. 736 of 2019, under sections 498A, 323, 504, 325, 307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Kotwali Dehat, District Bulandshahar pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bulandshahar on the basis of compromise are hereby quashed.

¶29

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

¶30

Order Date :- 29.3.2023/Arti

¶31

Digitally signed by :- ARTI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Abhishek v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abhishek 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

Mohd Imran and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

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

Ravindra Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ashish Udaar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anshuman Garg and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rinku Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another