Allowed

Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC9 May 2023A482/4546/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad invoked its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings instituted against the applicant. The court accepted the submission that the dispute was settled via a verified compromise deed, finding no need to prolong the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.5400 of 2021 (State Vs. Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and others) are quashed.

Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:100224

¶2

Court No. - 68 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4546 of 2022 Applicant :- Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nand Kishor Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶4

Heard Ms. Shilpa Ahuja, holding brief of Mr. Nand Kishor Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. K.P. Pathak, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶5

On 12.04.2022, the following order was passed:-

¶6

"Learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 are present.

¶7

It is submitted by learned counsel for the parties that the parties have entered into compromise and they have filed a compromise deed before the court below and sought a direction to the concerned court below for the verification of the said compromise.

¶8

Accordingly, the parties are directed to appear before the court below along with certified copy of this order and move an application for verification of the aforesaid compromise, which shall be decided by the court below within a period of 15 days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

¶9

After due verification, learned counsel for the parties are directed to obtain certified copy of compromise deed and order of its verification and place it before this Court on the next date fixed.

¶10

Put up as fresh on 8.7.2022.

¶11

Till then, no coercive process shall be issued against the applicants in Criminal Case No.5400 of 2021 (State Vs. Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.04 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station Didoli, Amroha."

¶12

In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise verification report has been placed on record as is evident from office report dated 01.03.2023. A letter of In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha dated 26.07.2022 has been placed along with order dated 25.04.2022 vide which compromise has been verified in presence of the parties along with their respective counsels.

¶13

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that in view of the aforesaid compromise being verified by the Court concerned, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case may be quashed by

¶14

this Court.

¶15

Learned A.G.A. for the State as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, they have no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶16

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

¶17

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

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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.

¶23

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) in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶24

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by counsel for the parties, the court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned criminal case as the parties have already settled their dispute.

¶25

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.5400 of 2021 (State Vs. Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and others), arising out of Case Crime No.04 of 2021, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 308 I.P.C., Police Station- Didoli, Amroha, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed .

¶26

The application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶27

Order Date :- 9.5.2023/Rahul.

¶28

Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mehandi Hasan @ Nanhu 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

Shivam Gaur Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kannaujiya Alias Rakesh Kumar and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kalpana Kumari Vs State of U.P. and Anothers

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

Km. Rashmi and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitendra Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others