Single judge quashedSessions Courtproceedings underSections 498A IPCDowry Prohibition Actdue to verified compromise and consequent absence of societal impactcitingSupremecourtprecedents.
Proceedings in Complaint Case No. 2334 of 2013 under Sections 498A, 323, 506 IPC and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 are quashed.
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.
Court No. - 64
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8723 of 2023
Applicant :- Gulshan Garg And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sandeep Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State.
This application has been filed seeking to quash proceedings of Complaint Case No. 2334 of 2013, Smt. Shalu alias Parul vs. Gulshan Garg and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (Crime against women), Saharanpur.
The Judicial Magistrate (crime against women), Saharanpur has submitted a report dated 27.03.2023, reporting that the compromise has been verified, after identification of all parties by learned Counsel representing them. Along with the report, a xerox copy of the compromise application dated 07.12.2016 and a copy of the order dated 24.02.2023 verifying the compromise has been filed. A perusal of the compromise shows that the complainantopposite party does not want to pursue the prosecution any further.
The learned A.G.A. has no objection to the proceedings being quashed in terms of the compromise, since the offence is essentially one that does not much affect the society at large.
Looking to the nature of the injuries, offence charged, the nature of allegations and overall circumstances, this Court finds that offence
involved is not one of wide ramification in society or one that makes the State's function, as the forerunner of the prosecution, the primary one. It is a case where, within the parameters of the holding of their Lordships of the Supreme Court in Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab and another (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another (2012) 10 SCC 303 , the proceedings can be quashed in order to secure the ends of justice.
Looking to the terms of the compromise, no useful purpose would be served by permitting this prosecution to continue, which would be an abuse of process of Court. Rather, it would only involve avoidable expenditure of resources, time and energy in holding a trial, the result whereof is obvious. It would also result in harassment of parties. In the circumstances, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
This application is, accordingly, allowed . The proceedings in Complaint Case No. 2334 of 2013, Smt. Shalu alias Parul vs. Gulshan Garg and others, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur, pending in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate (Crime against women), Saharanpur are hereby quashed.
An entry shall be caused to be made in the G.D. of Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur that all proceedings arising out Complaint Case No. 2334 of 2013 stand quashed, under orders of this Court. This part of the order shall be caused to be carried out in the records of the police station concerned by the Judicial Magistrate (Crime against women), Saharanpur.
Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Judicial Magistrate (Crime against women), Saharanpur through the learned Sessions Judge, Saharanpur and the Station House Officer, Police Station Sadar Bazar, District Saharanpur through the Commissioner of Police, Saharanpur by the Registrar (Compliance) within a week .
Order Date :- 7.4.2023 I. Batabyal
Digitally signed by :- ISHAN BATABYAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal proceedings under Sections 498A IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 can be quashed on account of a verified compromise.
Whether the offence involved is of wide ramification in society making prosecution non-compounded.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Narinder Singh & others v. State of PunjabApplied¶10
Narinder Singh & others v. State of Punjab and another (2014) 6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabApplied¶10
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another (2012) 10 SCC 303 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Gulshan Garg And 2 Others
State of U.P. and Another
J.J. Munir
Ishan Batabyal
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
