Allowed

Jamir Hasan v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC19 May 2023A482/5508/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings for cheating and forgery. The Court noted that the parties had amicably settled the dispute and filed a verified compromise deed before the trial court, relying on various apex court precedents.

What did the court decide?

Criminal Case No. 70 of 2019 (State Vs. Jamir Hasan) arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2017 is quashed.

Jamir Hasan Vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:110770

¶2

Court No. - 70

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5508 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Jamir Hasan Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Pavan Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Santosh Kumar Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Shekhar Kumar Yadav,J.

¶6

Certified copy of the compromise verification order submitted by learned counsel or the applicant today in the Court, the same is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 as well as perused the material available on record.

¶8

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the cognizance order dated 14.01.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 70 of 2019 (State Vs. Jamir Hasan), arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2017, under Sections - 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Nahtaur, District - Bijnor, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-I, Bijnor.

¶9

The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably and in furtherance thereof, they have filed a compromise deed before the Court below. Thereafter, this Court, vide order 10.4.2023, has sent the said compromise deed to the trial court with a direction to get the same verified and submit a report.

¶10

Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the

¶11

fact that the parties have settled their dispute amicably and they have filed compromise deed and the same has been verified by the trial Court, vide order dated 10.04.2023, kept on record of this case.

¶12

In the present case, the sections involved are Sections 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C..

¶13

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that the parties in dispute are not interested to pursue the criminal case.

¶14

Therefore, in view of the above and considering the dictum of the Apex Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another; 2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303; State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh (2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 70 of 2019 (State Vs. Jamir Hasan), arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2017, under Sections - 420, 406, 504 and 506 I.P.C., Police Station - Nahtaur, District - Bijnor, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-I, Bijnor are hereby quashed.

¶15

Accordingly, the instant application is allowed.

¶16

Order Date :- 19.5.2023 Krishna*

¶17

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

Jamir Hasan v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jamir Hasan 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

Deep Singh and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Basil Publishing Private Limited through Its Director Nikhil Gupta Vs State of U.P.and 3 Others

Sanju Pathak @ Sanjeev Sharma and 5 Othesr Vs State of U.P. and Another

Amit Kumar Pandey and 2 Ors. Vs State of Up and Another

Anil Tiwari and 8 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Anurag Singh and Another Vs State of Up. and Another