Allowed

Sachin v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC1 Aug 2024A482/10982/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash the charge sheet, summoning order, and criminal proceedings following a verified settlement between the parties, subject to a deposit of Rs. 10,000 each for legal services.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet, summoning order, and criminal proceedings were quashed, subject to the deposit of Rs. 10,000 each by the applicant and opposite party no. 2 before the trial court.

Sachin vs State of U.P. and Another — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:123636

¶2

Court No. - 77

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10982 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sachin Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shivangi Bhargava,Vaishali Jaiswal Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ajay Kumar Srivastava,Ajay Shanker Pandey,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Samit Gopal,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Shivangi Bhargava, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Ajay Shanker Pandey, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2, Sri Ajay Singh, learned A.G.A-I for the State and perused the records.

¶7

Vakalatnama of Sri Ajay Shanker Pandey is not on the record. Office to trace it out and place it on the record and make a note about it in the order sheet.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 23.10.2023 as well as summoning order dated 02.1.2024 including entire criminal proceedings in Case No. 4682 of 2023, State vs. Sachin, on the basis of compromise done between the parties arising out of Case Crime (FIR) No. 415 of 2023, under Sections 294, 354, 354B, 506 I.P.C., pending in the court of Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad relating to Police Station Thakurdwar, District Moradabad. It is further prayed to stay the further proceedings of said case.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicant argued that the parties have settled the dispute amicably out of court and on the basis of compromise the applicants filed present application before this Court in which an order for verification of the compromise was passed on 10.6.2024. It is argued that in compliance of the order dated 10.6.2024 of this Court, the parties have filed the order of this Court before the concerned court for its verification after which the concerned court has verified the said compromise vide its order dated 20.7.2024, copy of the said order is on record which has been placed by the office vide its order dated 24.7.2024. It is argued that the opposite party no. 2 is not interested to pursue the matter pending in the trial court and is not inclined to give any evidence against the applicants and therefore the impugned proceedings be quashed on the ground of compromise between the parties.

¶10

5.Learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 does not dispute the said arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that the impugned proceedings be quashed.

¶11

Learned State counsel opposed the prayer for quashing but could not dispute the fact that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties which was duly verified by the concerned trial court.

¶12

The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement

¶13

arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of (1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4 SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation : (2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16 SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5) Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC 278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can be quashed.

¶14

From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising powers by this Court to quash the proceedings/charge sheet/summoning order as prayed for by the applicant(s).

¶15

The present application is allowed.

¶16

The charge sheet and summoning order and the proceedings of the said case are hereby quashed subject to the applicant and the opposite party no. 2 depositing Rs.10,000/- each before the concerned trial court which shall be utilized by the District Legal Services Authority of the district.

¶17

(Samit Gopal,J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 1.8.2024 Naresh

¶19

Digitally signed by :- NARESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Sachin v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sachin 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shailendra @ Chintu and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Sushil Kumar Saroj and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ranjeet and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Sanjay Alias Pappu Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Jitin @ Jitin Mishra @ Nanku Mishra and Another vs State of U.P. and Another