Allowed

Hawaldar Tiwari and 2 Other v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2024/1662/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving charges of attempted murder and assault. The court noted a verified compromise between the applicant and the State, ruling that no judicial purpose would be served by continuing the trial.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are quashed in terms of the compromise.

Hawaldar Tiwari and 2 Other Vs State… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:47218

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1662 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Hawaldar Tiwari And 2 Other Opposite Party :- State Of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Arvind Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Chetan Kumar Tiwari, Advocate has put in appearance for the private opposite party nos. 2 to 4 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicant(s), learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

¶8

Instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant(s)/petitioner(s) for quashing the proceedings of Session Trial No. 07/2016 pending in the Court of Session Judge, Shrawasti arising out of charge sheet dated 27.08.2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 1228/2015, under Sections 308, 324, 323, 452, 427, 504, 506 IPC, P.S.- Ikauna, District- Shrawasti.

¶9

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 12409 of 2023 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated 19.12.2023 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶10

It appears from the order dated 10.01.2024 that the court concerned has verified the compromise, mentioning therein that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels before the court.

¶11

For the relief(s) sought, on the basis of compromise, the learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Romgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 (1) SCJ 536, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi,

¶12

2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409.

¶13

Learned Additional Government Advocate could not dispute the fact that the compromise has been entered into between the parties and now the opposite party no. 2 does not want to proceed with the proceedings in issue.

¶14

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the order of trial Court dated 10.01.2024 as also taking note of the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, and the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending before the trial court and hence, entire proceedings in issue are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise.

¶15

Accordingly, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in above terms.

¶16

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to concerned Court forthwith.

¶17

Order Date :- 11.7.2024 Mohit Singh/-

¶18

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

Hawaldar Tiwari and 2 Other v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hawaldar Tiwari and 2 Other v. State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ali Akhtar Thru Mother Smt. Nasreen Akhtar Vs State of U.P. and Anr.

Manoj Soni and Another Vs State of U.P. and Another

Indal Prasad Lodh (Actual Name Indal Prasad) and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt.of Home Govt. of U.P. Lko. and 6 Others

Nand Kumar and Others Vs State of U.P. Throu. the Princ. Secty. Home ,Civil Sect. U.P. Gov. and Another

Golu @ Vishal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Salman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another