Allowed

Sudheer Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Apr 2023A482/9424/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In an application under Section 482 CrPC, the Single Judge quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 363, 366 IPC based on a verified compromise. The court held that continuing the prosecution would be an abuse of process and unnecessary harassment, as the offence did not affect society at large.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings in Case No. 93 of 2005 under Sections 363, 366 IPC involving the applicant were quashed.

Sudheer Kumar Agrawal Vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9424 of 2023

¶3

Applicant :- Sudheer Kumar Agrawal Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and others Counsel for Applicant :- Gaurav Srivastav,Rajesh Kumar Srivastava

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dileep Kumar Yadav

¶5

Hon'ble J.J. Munir,J.

¶6

Heard learned Counsel for the applicants, Mr. Dileep Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel for the opposite parties nos. 2 and 3, and Mr. Shashi Shekhar Tiwari, learned A.G.A. appearing on behalf of the State.

¶7

This application has been filed seeking to quash proceedings of Case No. 93 of 2005, State vs. Sudheer Agrawal (arising out of Case Crime No. 151 of 2004) under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Lohamandi, District Agra, pending in the Court of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

¶8

A perusal of the order dated 22.12.2022 shows that the compromise has been verified by the In-charge Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

¶9

Mr. Dileep Kumar Yadav, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of opposite parties nos. 2 and 3, states that the compromise has indeed been verified and carried in the document as Annexure No. 6. The compromise is a document dated 08.09.2022, which indicates that the complainant does not want to prosecute the case any further.

¶10

The learned A.G.A. has no objection to the proceedings being quashed in terms of the compromise, since the offence is

¶11

essentially one that does not much affect the society at large.

¶12

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.

¶13

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.

¶14

This application is, accordingly, allowed . The proceedings in Case No. 93 of 2005, State vs. Sudheer Agrawal (arising out of Case Crime No. 151 of 2004) under Sections 363, 366 I.P.C., Police Station Lohamandi, District Agra, pending in the Court of the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra are hereby quashed.

¶15

An entry shall be caused to be made in the G.D. of Police Station Lohamandi, District Agra that all proceedings arising out Case Crime No. 151 of 2004 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 Special Chief

¶16

Judicial Magistrate, Agra.

¶17

Let a copy of this order be forwarded to the Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Agra through the learned Sessions Judge, Agra and to the Station House Officer, Police Station Lohamandi, District Agra through the Commissioner of Police, Agra by the Registrar (Compliance) within a week .

¶18

Order Date :- 5.4.2023 I. Batabyal

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ISHAN BATABYAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sudheer Kumar Agrawal v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudheer Kumar Agrawal 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Poonam Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another

Shrenik Dheerajmal Siroya, Partner Siroya Developers Vs State of U.P. and Another

Het Singh Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Gaurav Saini Vs State of U.P. and Another

Om Jee Mishra Vs State of U.P. and Another