Allowed

Smt. Shahana and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 May 2023A482/41604/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Held applications made under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 504 IPC allowed after parties filed a verified compromise deed, concluding no useful purpose would be served by prolonging proceedings.

What did the court decide?

All criminal proceedings under Sections 323, 504 IPC arising from Case Crime No. 133 of 2021 in Case No. 32756 of 2021 pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar are quashed.

Smt. Shahana and 3 Others Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 41604 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Smt. Shahana And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Mani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Naresh Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶5

Heard Sri K.M. Gupta, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and Mr. Shiv Dutt Yadav, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ram Naresh Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, and perused the records.

¶6

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash Chargesheet dated 02.12.2021 bearing no. 147 of 2021 along with cognizance order dated 13.05.2022 passed by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate No. 8, Kanpur Nagar as well as entire criminal proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 133 of 2021 in Case No. 32756 of 2021, 'State v. Shahana and others', under Sections 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Juhi, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.

¶7

Earlier, on 15.02.2023, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"1. As prayed by learned counsel for applicant, put up this case as fresh on 23.02.2023.

¶9

By the next date learned counsel for applicant shall file a supplementary affidavit bringing on record the compromise entered into by the parties.

¶10

In case no compromise deed/application has been filed before court below, the same shall be filed and certified copy of aforesaid compromise deed/application shall be obtained and brought on record by means of a supplementary affidavit to be filed by applicant by the next date fixed."

¶11

In compliance of the aforesaid order, the parties filed compromise deed before the court concerned and the same has been verified by order dated 27.04.2023 in the presence of parties along with their respective counsel. Certified copy of the aforesaid order has been brought on record at Page-13 of the supplementary affidavit dated 03.5.2023.

¶12

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 applicant in the aforesaid case is liable to be quashed by this Court.

¶13

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.

¶14

Before proceeding any further it shall be apt to make a brief reference to the following cases:-

¶15

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

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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.

¶21

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.

¶22

Accordingly, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 133 of 2021 in Case No. 32756 of 2021, 'State v. Shahana and others', under Sections 323, 504 IPC, Police Station Juhi, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar are hereby quashed.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

Order Date :- 5.5.2023 DS

¶26

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

Smt. Shahana and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Shahana 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

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

Sanjeev and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Gaurav Kumar Rajput and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajan Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Verma and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt Kalawati and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another