Allowed

Pradeep Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC19 Mar 2024/1367/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings due to an amicable settlement and compromise between the parties involving charges of cruelty and intimidation.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.371 of 2024 pending in Court of Civil Judge, Junior Division, FTC Crime Against Women, District Unnao.

Pradeep Kumar Bajpai Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:24159

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1367 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pradeep Kumar Bajpai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,O.P. Tiwari

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

1. Heard Sri Vivek Shukla, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Puneet Kumar Yadav, the learned Government Counsel and Sri Gaurav Mishra, holding brief of Sri O.P. Tiwari, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and perused the record.

¶8

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant have sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.371 of 2024, under Sections 452, 506, 354 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao arising out of the Case Crime No. 0813 of 2023, Police Station as well as charge-sheet No. 677/23, dated 18.10.2023 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, FTC Crime Against Women, District Unnao.

¶9

3. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at a compromise. A copy of compromise deed has been placed on record as Annexure-3 to the application. The learned counsel for the parties have confirmed the terms of compromise.

¶10

4. The learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 does not

¶11

have any objection, if the impugned proceedings are quashed against the applicants.

¶12

5. Considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is of private nature and it does not affect the public at large and ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab : (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another : (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶13

6. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present application is allowed and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.371 of 2024, under Sections 452, 506, 354 IPC, Police Station Kotwali, District Unnao arising out of the Case Crime No. 0813 of 2023, Police Station as well as chargesheet No. 677/23, dated 18.10.2023 pending in the Court of learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, FTC Crime Against Women, District Unnao are quashed.

¶14

(Subhash Vidyarthi, J.)

¶15

Order Date :- 19.3.2024 Ram.

¶16

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Pradeep Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pradeep Kumar Bajpai v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Master S Thru. His Father Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Umesh Gaud @ Unesh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Juvenile X in Case Cr. No. 758/2023 Thru. Her Father Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Deptt. of Women and Child Development and 4 Others

Kamreyaz Alam Thru. Mother Nurjaha Begam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Lalit Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Prince Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others