Allowed

Santosh Kumar Alias Santosh Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC21 Feb 2024A482/1473/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application under Section 482 CrPC sought quashing of summoning order and charge-sheet proceedings under Sections 352, 504 and 506 IPC following an out-of-court compromise verified by the trial court. Relying on Supreme Court precedents on quashing upon settlement, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Summoning order dated 14/12/2023 and entire proceedings arising from charge-sheet dated 10.5.2023 in FIR No.92 of 2023 were quashed.

Santosh Kumar Alias Santosh Katiyar vs State of U.P… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 15

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1473 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Alias Santosh Katiyar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sachin Kumar Pandey,Mirza Ataulla Beg Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Akhil Kumar Singh

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri Akhil Kumar Singh, Advocate, learned counsel for respondent nos.2 as well as perused the record.

¶6

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicants for quashing of the summoning order dated 14/12/2023 along with entire proceeding arising out of impugned charge-sheet dated 10.5.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur in FIR No.92 of 2023 dated 14.4.2023 under Section 352, 504 and 506 I.P.C. at Police Station Naimisharanya, District Sitapur.

¶7

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the parties have been amicably settled the dispute outside the court by way of compromise. The copy of the compromise is on record as Annexure-3 to the application. On the basis of the said compromise, the matter was sent to learned trial court for verification of compromise in the presence of parties, by this court vide order dated 21.2.2024.

¶8

Further it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in compliance of order passed by this Court, parties had appeared before the trial court on 14.3.2024, who in the presence of the parties has verified the compromise entered between the parties. The copy of the verification report dated 29.2.2024 is on record.

¶9

Learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. has also no objection if the impugned proceedings are quashed.

¶11

Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in 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 State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466 , the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.

¶12

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 the trial court and the verification report is on record as well as considering the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases (supra), it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶13

Accordingly, the present petition is allowed and the summoning order dated 14/12/2023 along with entire proceeding arising out of impugned charge-sheet dated 10.5.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitapur in FIR No.92 of 2023 dated 14.4.2023 under Section 352, 504 and 506 I.P.C. at Police Station Naimisharanya, District Sitapur., are hereby quashed.

¶14

Order Date :- 3.5.2024 Madhu

¶15

Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Kumar Alias Santosh Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar Alias Santosh Katiyar v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Prin. 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

Saurabh Alias Sajan Kumar Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Alok Kumar Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Dept. of Home, Lko

Susheel Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Raju Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Sandeep Sahu Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Nirmal Das @ Govind Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Ors.