Allowed

Rashid and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC3 Apr 2023A482/4942/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court quashed the criminal proceedings in Complaint Case No. 1647 of 2010 under Sections 147, 323, 452, 427, and 504 IPC. The court allowed the Section 482 Cr.P.C. application after verifying that a compromise was entered into between the parties and upheld by the trial court.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1647 of 2010 under Sections 147, 323, 452, 427, 504 IPC pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rampur are hereby quashed.

Rashid and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 73

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4942 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Rashid And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Indra Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Shiv Shanker Prasad,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Additional Government Advocate for the State and perused the materials on record.

¶7

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed to quash the summoning order dated 12.07.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Rampur as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1647 of 2010 (Nabbu Vs. Rashid and Others), under Sections 147, 323, 452, 427, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Ajim Nagar, District Rampur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rampur.

¶8

On 09.02.2023, the Court has passed following order:

¶9

"Heard Mr. Indra Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and the learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶10

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated 12.07.2011 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Rampur as well as entire criminal proceeding of Complaint Case No. 1647 of 2010 (Nabbu Vs. Rashid and Others), under Sections 147, 323, 452, 427, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Ajim Nagar, District Rampur, pending in the Court of Judicial Maigistrate, Rampur.

¶11

It is submitted on behalf of the applicants that both the parties are known to each other very well and the dispute between them is due to some misunderstanding. He further submits that on account of intervention of wellwishers of the applicants 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 applicants. It is, thus, contended that proceedings of the aforesaid case be quashed in the light of law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Gian Singh v. State of Punjab : (2012) 10 SCC 303.

¶12

Whether a compromise has taken place or not can at best be ascertained by

¶13

the court, where the proceedings are pending, after ensuring the presence of the parties before it.

¶14

Put up this case on 17.03.2023 as fresh before the appropriate Bench.

¶15

Learned counsel for the applicants 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 16.02.2023 and the court concerned after noticing opposite party no. 2 to remain present before its Court on 16.02.2023 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.

¶16

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

¶17

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.

¶18

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

¶19

Pursuant to the above order, the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 1, Rampur vide order dated 16.02.2023 has verified the compromise so entered into between the parties. Certified copies of the order of the learned Additional Civil Judge (J.D.), Court No. 1, Rampur dated 16.02.2023 and the compromise have been brought on record as annexure no. S.A.-1 to the supplementary affidavit.

¶20

Learned counsel for the applicants 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 case are liable to be quashed.

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

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.

¶28

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

¶29

Accordingly, the proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1647 of 2010 (Nabbu Vs. Rashid and Others), under Sections 147, 323, 452, 427, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Ajim Nagar, District Rampur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Rampur are hereby quashed.

¶30

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

¶31

Order Date :- 3.4.2023 SK Srivastava

¶32

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

Rashid and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rashid and 4 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

Hardeep and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kusum Sonker and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Dilshad and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajendra Bahadur and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sunita and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another