Allowed

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Mar 2023A482/4396/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings following a verified compromise between the applicant and the parties against whom the case was instituted. The dispute arose from misunderstanding and was settled with the intervention of well-wishers, verified by the court below.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Session Case No. 1728 of 2022 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar) arising from Crime No. 384 of 2022 are hereby quashed.

Shiv Kumar Vs State of U.P. and… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4396 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Shiv Kumar Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Deepak Rana Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Kumar Yadav

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicant is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, and Ms. Pallavi Rani, Advocate holding the brief of Sri Pankaj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 as well as perused the materials on record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the entire proceeding of Session Case No. 1728 of 2022 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar) as well as charge sheet dated 10.09.2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 384 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 354-Kha I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a, 3(1)(b)(i) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Dhaulana, District Hapur, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur.

¶8

On 10.02.2023, the Court has passed following order:

¶9

"Heard Mr. Deepak Rana, learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Pankaj Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no.2 and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceeding of Session Case No. 1728 of 2022 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar) as well as charge sheet dated 10.09.2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 384 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 354-Kha I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a, 3(1)(b)(i) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Dhaulana, District Hapur pending in the Court of Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur on the basis of compromise so entered into between the parties.

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that both the parties are known to each other very well and the dispute between them is due to misunderstanding. He further submits that on account of intervention of well-wishers of the applicant and opposite party no.2, they have settled their disputes and arrived at a compromise. On the basis of said compromise, an affidavit has been filed by opposite party no.2 before the court below that he does not want to press the criminal proceedings initiated by him against the applicant. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down

¶12

by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶13

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 also does not dispute the correctness of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶14

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

¶15

Put up this case on 27.03.2023 as fresh before the appropriate Bench.

¶16

Learned counsel for the parties undertake that he shall make a fresh compromise application before the court below within a week from today for verification of the aforesaid compromise. He further undertake to ensure his presence before the court below or any other transferee court, as the case may be, on 17.02.2023 and the court concerned, thereafter, shall ascertain the veracity of the compromise. If the said compromise is verified, the same shall be made part of the record and report to that effect, will be prepared and the parties would be allowed to obtain certified copy thereof and file the same before this Court.

¶17

Office is directed to send through FAX a copy of this order within 24 hours.

¶18

Parties are also directed to produce certified copy of this order along with a fresh compromise application before the court concerned within a week from today.

¶19

Till the next date of listing, no coercive steps would be taken against the applicant in the aforesaid criminal case."

¶20

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Additional District Judge / Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur vide order dated 17.02.2023 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of learned Additional District Judge / Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur dated 17.02.2023 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure no. S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶21

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in view of compromise so entered into between the parties, which has also been verified by the concerned Magistrate, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are liable to be quashed.

¶22

Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has also not denied the aforesaid facts. On instructions received from opposite party no.2, he submits that he has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed. He also undertakes that the amount which was given to the opposite party no. 2 as compensation under the provision of S.C./S.T. Act shall be

¶23

returned to the authority concerned within two weeks.

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

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 case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶32

Accordingly, the proceeding of Session Case No. 1728 of 2022 (State Vs. Shiv Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 384 of 2022, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 354, 354-Kha I.P.C. and Section 3(2)5a, 3(1)(b)(i) of S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station Dhaulana, District Hapur, pending in the Court of learned Special Judge, S.C./S.T. Act, Hapur are hereby quashed.

¶33

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

¶34

Order Date :- 27.3.2023 SK Srivastava

¶35

Digitally signed by :- SAILESH KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Shiv Kumar v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiv Kumar 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

Raj Kamal and 7 Others Vs State of U.P and Another

Sushil Kumar Pandey and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dropadi Vs State of U.P. and 13 Others

Nasir Khan Vs State of U.P. and Another

Praveen Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Sanjeev Kumar Rana Vs State of U.P. and Another