Allowed

Harjeet Singh Lakha v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC16 Oct 2024A482/18083/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this quashing application under Section 482 CrPC, the Allahabad High Court considered a dispute arising from a civil money claim under Section 420 IPC. The parties had reached an amicable settlement and verified their compromise. Finding the dispute private with no serious societal impact, the Court held that continuing proceedings would serve no useful purpose and, relying on Supreme Court pre

What did the court decide?

Impugned summoning order dated 12.12.2014 and entire proceedings of complaint case No. 4438 of 2016 against applicant are quashed.

Harjeet Singh Lakha vs State of U.P. and Another — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:164331

¶2

Court No. - 75

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18083 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Harjeet Singh Lakha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shahnawaz Akhtar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd Ajmal Farooqui

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/complainant and learned AGA for the State.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including summoning order dated 12.12.2014, of complaint case No. 4438 of 2016, (Old No. 1079/2014), under Section 420 IPC, P.S. Islamnagar, District Budaun, pending in the court of A.C.J.M.-2, Budaun, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the alleged dispute between the parties is purely civil in nature regarding money dispute and now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter. The complainant of the case does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings against the applicant. It was submitted that in pursuance of the order dated 22.08.2023 passed by this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 29642 of 2023, the compromise filed by the parties before the trial court concerned, has already been verified by the court concerned, copy of which has been annexed as annexure no. 5 to the application. In respect of co-accused Vivek Kaushik, the proceedings of the case have already been quashed by this Court, copy of which is available on record. It was stated that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served

¶9

by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶10

Learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/complainant has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicant and submitted that both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and the complainant does not want to proceed with the case pending before the trial court and the impugned proceedings may be quashed, as no useful purpose would be served by exhausting remedy of trial.

¶11

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶12

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶13

It is well settled that in appropriate cases complaint proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties. In the instant case, it appears that the dispute between the parties appears to be private in nature and does not have any serious impact on society if parties compromise the matter. There is nothing to indicate that parties have any criminal antecedents. The complainant does not want to proceed with the case against the applicant. The compromise filed by the parties before the trial court, has already been verified by the court concerned. Considering the law laid down in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 and the facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed, as the continuance of the same would be nothing but wastage of time of Court.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned summoning order and entire proceedings of the aforesaid complaint case against applicant are hereby quashed.

¶15

The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed .

¶16

Order Date :- 16.10.2024 Anand

¶17

Digitally signed by :- ANAND VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Harjeet Singh Lakha v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harjeet Singh Lakha 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

Arvind Singh Bhadauriya @ Raju Bhadauriya and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Devendra Kumar and 8 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Raghuvir Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajeev Jain vs State of Up and Another

Smt Asha Devi vs State of U.P. and Another

Narendra @ Rajendra and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another