Vinod Bahal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

Vinod Bahal and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2023) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the summoning order dated 28.08.2015 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27712 of 2018 (State Vs. Mohan Krishna Garg and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 960 of 2015, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

Issue for consideration

Whether the summoning order dated 28.08.2015 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27712 of 2018 (State Vs. Mohan Krishna Garg and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 960 of 2015 under Sections 120B, 504 and 506 I.P.C., should be quashed in view of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and the submissions of counsel, the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the case.

Ratio / Principle

The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27712 of 2018 (arising out of Case Crime No. 960 of 2015) are quashed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (Court No. 72), Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma, J., Order dated 28.1.2023, in Application U/S 482 No. 5472 of 2019 (Vinod Bahal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another). The applicants sought quashing of the summoning order dated 28.08.2015 and the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27712 of 2018 (State v. Mohan Krishna Garg and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 960 of 2015 under Sections 120B, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, pending before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad. Counsel submitted that the parties had settled the matter by a verified compromise, the report of which was placed before the Court. Drawing on the Apex Court decisions in B.S. Joshi, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, Gian Singh and Narindra Singh, and referring to the Allahabad High Court decision in Shaifullah (2013 (83) ACC 278), the Court held that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings, allowed the application and quashed the proceedings.

Court No. - 72

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5472 of 2019

Applicant :- Vinod Bahal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sushil Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Umesh Chandra Sharma,J.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

This application has been moved with the prayer to quash the impugned summoning order dated 28.08.2015 as well as entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27712 of 2018 (State Vs. Mohan Krishna Garg and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 960 of 2015, under Sections 120B, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad.

Learned counsel for the parties submitted that parties settled the matter by way of compromise, copy of the report of verified compromise deed has been placed before the Court, hence proceeding and impugned order is liable to be quashed.

The attention of this Court has been drawn to the following judgements of the Apex Court:-

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

2. Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation [2008) 9 SCC 677].

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

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

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

In the aforesaid cases, 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. and another, 2013 (83) ACC 278 in which the law expounded by the Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

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 would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned cases.

The application is, accordingly, allowed .

In view of the above, the proceedings of the aforesaid case are hereby, quashed.

Order Date :- 28.1.2023 Md Faisal

Digitally signed by :- MOHD FAISAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad