Allowed

Meraj Ahmad and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC27 Apr 2023A482/6949/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings based on verified compromise between parties. Court observed continuation would cause harassment and waste resources, ordering proceedings quashed to prevent abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Case No. 2403 of 2009 under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act pending in Judicial Magistrate-I, Jaunpur, are quashed.

Meraj Ahmad and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6949 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Meraj Ahmad And 4 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dharmendra Kumar Singh,Vijay Laxmi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Diwakar Shukla,Vijay Laxmi

¶4

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and leaned AGA for the State.

¶6

This is an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash the proceedings in Case No. 2403 of 2009 (State vs. Meraj Ahmad and others, (arising out of Case Crime No. 422 of 2007) under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Chandwak, District Jaunpur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Jaunpur.

¶7

In compliance with the order dated 24.02.2023, the Judicial Magistrate-I, Jaunpur has submitted a report dated 23.03.2023 reporting that the parties have verified the compromise. Along with the report, a copy of the order dated 23.03.2023 verifying the compromise and a copy of the compromise application dated 22.03.2023 has also been forwarded.

¶8

Learned AGA states that looking to the nature of the offences, the State, though the forerunner of the prosecution, does not have much objection to advance. The offence is one which does not have wide social ramification.

¶9

A perusal of the papers shows that the parties have duly verified the compromise and in terms of the compromise they do not wish to prosecute the case any further.

¶10

The purport of the compromise is that the complainant/opposite party does not want to prosecute the impugned proceedings any further. Since the offences charged are not compoundable, the applicants have approached this Court invoking our jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the proceedings.

¶11

Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, perusing the compromise and its verification by the learned Magistrate, this Court is of opinion that permitting the proceedings impugned to

¶12

continue would be an exercise in futility and harassment of parties. It would also lead to wastage of time, energy and resources with no profit to anyone. In the circumstances, in order to prevent abuse of process of Court and to secure the ends of justice, this Court is of the opinion that the impugned proceedings ought to be quashed.

¶13

In the result this application succeeds and is allowed.

¶14

The proceedings of Case No. 2403 of 2009 (State vs. Meraj Ahmad and others, (arising out of Case Crime No. 422 of 2007) under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. Chandwak, District Jaunpur, pending in the Court of Judicial Magistrate-I, Jaunpur, are hereby quashed.

¶15

An entry shall be caused to be made in the G.D. of Police Station Chandwak, District Jaunpur that all proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 422 of 2007 stand quashed under orders of this Court. It shall be ensured by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur, that this part of the order is carried out in the GD of the Police Station concerned.

¶16

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jaunpur through the learned Sessions Judge, Jaunpur and the S.H.O., P.S. Chandwak, District Jaunpur,, through the Superintendent of Police, Junpur, by the Registrar (Compliance) within a week.

¶17

Order Date :- 27.4.2023 Vijay

¶18

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

Meraj Ahmad and 4 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meraj Ahmad 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jagdish Pandey Vs State of U.P. and Another

Ram Babu and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Parmanand Yadav Vs State of U.P. and Another

Hridayanand and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Sher Mohammad and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gautam Bharti Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others