Allowed

Smt Kalawati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 May 2023A482/6090/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court quashed criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. arising out of Section 313 IPC. The parties verified a compromise before the Lower Court with the consent of the State, prompting quashing as no useful purpose would be served by continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

Quashed entire proceedings of Case No.6974 of 1999 (State vs. Smt. Kalawati and others) pending in Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi.

Smt Kalawati and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 68

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6090 of 2021

¶3

Applicant :- Smt Kalawati And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel,Himanshu Pandey,Shivani Singh

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rabindra Tiwari

¶5

Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Shivani Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

¶7

On 19.07.2021, the following order was passed:-

¶8

"Heard Sri Vinay Kumar Singh Chandel, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Rabindra Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondents.

¶9

This Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of entire proceedings of the Case No.6974 of 1999 (State Vs. Smt. Kalawati and others) arising out of Case Crime No.413 of 1993, under Section 313 IPC, Police Station-Cantt, District-Varanasi on the basis of compromise.

¶10

Sri Rabindra Tiwari, learned counsel appearing for the respondents does not dispute this factum of compromise.

¶11

Let parties appear before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi on 03.08.2021 for verification of compromise.

¶12

If compromise is verified, then learned Chief Judicial Magistrate to furnish his report on compromise by 10th August, 2021.

¶13

List on 17.08.2021.

¶14

It is directed that till then no coercive action will be taken against the applicants."

¶15

In compliance of the aforesaid order, compromise between the parties has been verified by the Court below vide order dated 03.08.2021 in presence of the parties along with their respective counsels. Certified copy of the aforesaid order has been placed in the supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants on 16.02.2022. The aforesaid fact has also been affirmed by letter dated 03.08.2021 of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, which has been placed on record, as is evident from office report dated 13.12.2021.

¶16

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 this Court.

¶17

Learned A.G.A. for the State also affirms that the parties have entered into compromise, he has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶18

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

¶19

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

¶20

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

¶21

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

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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.

¶25

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.

¶26

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.

¶27

Accordingly, the entire proceedings of Case No.6974 of 1999, (State vs. Smt. Kalawati and others), arising out of Case Crime No.413 of 1993, under Section 313 I.P.C., Police Station-Cantt., District-Varanasi, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Varanasi, on the basis of compromise, are hereby quashed .

¶28

The application is, accordingly, allowed .

¶29

Order Date :- 5.5.2023 Rahul.

¶30

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

Smt Kalawati and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt Kalawati and 2 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

Mahipal Singh and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sanjeev and 11 Others Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Gaurav Kumar Rajput and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajan Tomar Vs State of U.P. and Another

Govind Verma and Another Vs State of U.P.

Smt. Shahana and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another