Rahul Singh and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

Rahul Singh and 5 Others Vs State of Up and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceedings of Case No. 3183 of 2017 (State Vs. Rahul Singh and others) against the applicants Rahul Singh, Mahendra Narayan Singh, Jai Devi, Archana Singh, Atul Singh and Rajendra Prasad Singh.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case No. 3183 of 2017 (State Vs. Rahul Singh and others), arising out of case crime no. 24 of 217, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of the compromise arrived at between the parties.

Court's answer

The matter is a private matrimonial dispute; if the parties compromise, it would not have an adverse impact on society, and there is nothing to indicate that the parties have criminal antecedents.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the law laid down in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan (AIR 2019 SC 1296), the compromise arrived at between the parties (verified by the trial court), and the fact that the informant does not want to proceed with the case, it is in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed, as their continuance would be nothing but wastage of the Court's time.

Key takeaways

The entire proceedings of the criminal case against the applicants, namely Rahul Singh, Mahendra Narayan Singh, Jai Devi, Archana Singh, Atul Singh and Rajendra Prasad Singh, are quashed.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing — Section 482 Cr.P.C. — matrimonial dispute — entire proceedings of Case No. 3183 of 2017 (State Vs. Rahul Singh and others), arising out of case crime no. 24 of 217, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Jansa, District Varanasi, pending before ACJM-VI, Varanasi, quashed on the basis of compromise — parties amicably settled; compromise verified by the trial court; informant unwilling to proceed; no criminal antecedents; dispute private in nature, its compromise would have no adverse impact on society — following State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan, AIR 2019 SC 1296 — entire proceedings against applicants (Rahul Singh, Mahendra Narayan Singh, Jai Devi, Archana Singh, Atul Singh, Rajendra Prasad Singh) quashed; application allowed. (High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Raj Beer Singh, J., Order dated 23.8.2024; Neutral Citation 2024:AHC:136154)

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:136154

Court No. - 76

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 18808 of 2024

Applicant :- Rahul Singh And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Kumar Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2/informant and learned AGA for the State.

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred for quashing of the entire proceedings of case No. 3183 of 2017 (State Vs. Rahul Singh and others), arising out of case crime no. 24 of 217, under Sections 498A, 323, 504 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Jansa, District Varanasi, pending in the court of ACJM-VI, Varanasi, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no. 1 is husband of opposite party no. 2/informant and remaining applicants are family members of applicant no. 1 and the matter relates to matrimonial dispute. Now both the parties have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and the informant of the case does not want to pursue the impugned proceedings. It was submitted that the compromise, filed by the parties before the trial court concerned, has already been verified by the court concerned, copy of which is on record. It was stated that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and thus, the impugned proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 /informant has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants and submitted that both the parties

have amicably settled the dispute and compromised the matter and the informant 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.

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

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

In the instant case, it appears that matter relates to matrimonial dispute, which is private in nature. If parties compromise the matter, it would not have adverse impact on society. There is nothing to indicate that parties have any criminal antecedents. The informant does not want to proceed with the case against the applicants. 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.

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case against applicants, namely, Rahul Singh, Mahendra Narayan Singh, Jai Devi, Archana Singh, Atul Singh & Rajendra Prasad Singh are hereby quashed.

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

Order Date :- 23.8.2024

SP/-

Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad