Allowed

Mohd. Izhar Khan and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2024/205/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 498A, 323, 504, and 506 IPC. The court held that since the parties had entered into a verified compromise and supported the petition, continuing the prosecution would be futile, citing Supreme Court precedents.

What did the court decide?

The application was allowed; proceedings, chargesheet, and cognizance order dated 15.03.2018 and 29.01.2019 were quashed.

Mohd. Izhar Khan and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:3023

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 205 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohd. Izhar Khan And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- S.K. Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶5

Heard Sri S.K. Tripathi, the learned counsel for the applicants and Sri Anurag Verma, the learned A.G.A-I for the State and Sri Adarsh Srivastava, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2.

¶6

The instant application has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C, the applicant has sought quashing of the proceedings of the Case no. 152/2019 arising out of Case Crime No.37/2018, under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C, Police Station Bazar Khala District Lucknow pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Lucknow along with the Charge sheet dated 15.03.2018 and cognizance order dated 29.01.2019.

¶7

The quashing of the proceedings has been sought on the ground that the parties have entered into a compromise and a copy whereof has been annexed with the affidavit.

¶8

The applicants had filed an application under section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 8334 of 2023, which was disposed of by means of an order dated 22.08.2023 directing the trial court to verify the compromise. The compromise has been verified by means of an order dated 03.10.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- IV, Court No. 28, Lucknow.

¶9

The learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 has supported the prayer made by the applicant and has given his

¶10

consent for proceedings being quashed on the basis of compromise.

¶11

Considering the 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.

¶12

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present petition is allowed . The proceedings of the aforesaid case as well the charge Sheet dated 15.03.2018 and the cognizance order dated 29.01.2019 are hereby quashed.

¶13

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 11.1.2024 Preeti.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- PREETI GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd. Izhar Khan and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Izhar Khan and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko. 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Moin Ahmad Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Jan Mohd. and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy./Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Govt. of U.P. Lucknow and Another

Surendra Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Juvenile a of Crime No. 176/2023 Thru. His Father Z Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vinay Kumar Mishra and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Saroj Thru. His Brother Pankaj Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.