Single judge quashed criminal proceedings under Section 395 IPC arising from a family construction dispute, holding that a verified compromise deed precludes prolonging trials even in cognizable offences.
Quashed the summoning order dated 24.01.2020 and entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 347 of 2020.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC:151590
Court No. - 86
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6350 of 2020
Applicant :- Neetu Singh And 7 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Bharat Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajiv Gupta,J.
attention of this Court to the compromise deed dated 15.02.2023 drawn between the parties, a copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the second supplementary affidavit.
Order Date :- 28.7.2023 Subham
Digitally signed by :- SUBHAM KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Section 395 IPC can be quashed upon acquittal and settlement of disputes between family members.
Whether a compromise deed verified by the trial court justifies quashing the summoning order and entire trial proceedings under Section 482 CrPC.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278]Applied¶17
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Neetu Singh And 7 Others
State of U.P.
Rajiv Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
