Allowed

Mohd Amzad and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC24 Jul 2024/5535/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 CrPC to quash criminal proceedings involving allegations of 498A, 323, 506, 354 IPC and Dowry Prohibition Act offences. The court observed that the parties had amicably settled their dispute and submitted a verified compromise report to the trial court, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Parbatbhai Aahir to quash the case.

What did the court decide?

The proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27991 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 2 of 2021 are quashed in terms of the compromise dated 08.07.2024.

Mohd Amzad and Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50326

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5535 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd Amzad And Others Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Home, Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Avadhesh Kumar Singh,Aditi Patel,Shivani Maurya

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Aditi Patel,Ramendra Yadav

¶7

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶8

Heard Ms. Shivani Maurya, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Ramendra Yadav, learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A.

¶9

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. applicants, Mohd. Amzad, Afsar Ali, Smt. Jahida alias Gottu, Nusrat Ali, Hasrat Ali, Hazrat Ali, Smt. Chandani, Smt. Reshma, Shahrukh Ali, have sought quashing of the summoning order dated 24.03.2023, charge-sheet dated 19.06.2021 and the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27991 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 2 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 and 354 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Wazirganj, district Lucknow.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the

¶11

parties have amicable settled their dispute outside the Court by

¶12

way of compromise, which has been verified by the trial Court in compliance of the order dated 19.06.2024 passed by this Court in the instant application.

¶13

The record reveals that in compliance of the order dated 19.06.2024 passed by this Court, the trial Court vide letter dated 15.07.2024, which is on record, reported that compromise entered between the parties has been verified on 08.07.2024.

¶14

Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 concedes the argument made by learned counsel for the applicants.

¶15

Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Bhimsinhbhai Karmur & Ors vs State of Gujarat & Anr : (2017) 9 SCC 641, the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.

¶16

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified by trial Court on 08.07.2024 and the verification report dated 15.07.2024 is on record as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai

¶17

Bhimsinhbhai Karmur (supra), the present application is allowed and the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 27991 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 2 of 2021, under Sections 498A, 323, 506 and 354 I.P.C. and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Wazirganj, district Lucknow are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise dated 08.07.2024 entered between the parties.

¶18

( Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

¶19

Order Date :- 24.7.2024 Ajit

¶20

Digitally signed by :- AJIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Mohd Amzad and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd Amzad and Others v. the State of U.P. Thru. Addl.Chief Secy. Home, 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

Mohammad Qadeer and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, U.P. Lucknow and Another

Nandini Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Sudhanshu Chandel Vs State of U.P. Thru.Prin.Secy. Home Deptt. and Another

Ashok Soni Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Surendra @ Shalendra Vs the State of U.P and Anr.

Sunil Kumar Srivastava Vs the State of U.P and Anr.