Allowed

Rampal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC23 Jul 2024A482/21332/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings against applicants Rampal, Manoj, and Srivati. The court found that the matter stemmed from a matrimonial dispute that had been amicably settled and compromised. Relying on State of M.P. vs. Laxmi Narayan, the court held that quashing the proceedings would be in the interest of

What did the court decide?

The impugned cognizance order dated 24.04.2024 and the entire criminal proceedings under Case No. 1805 of 2024 against applicants Rampal, Manoj, and Srivati are hereby quashed.

Rampal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:143335

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21332 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Rampal And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Chandra Bhushan Yadav,Krishna Pratap Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material brought on record.

¶7

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge sheet dated 13.12.2023 as well as cognizance order dated 24.04.2024, of Case No. 1805 of 2024 (State vs. Manoj and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 105 of 2023, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 506, 354, 354-A I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Auraiya, pending before the court concerned, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no. 2 is husband, applicant no.1 is father-in-law and applicant no.3 is mother-in-law of opposite party no. 2/informant 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

¶9

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

¶11

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶12

It is well settled that in appropriate cases, criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties. In the instant case, 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 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.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned cognizance order and entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case against applicants, namely, Rampal, Manoj and Srivati are hereby quashed.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 4.9.2024 S Rawat

¶16

Digitally signed by :- SHOBHIT RAWAT High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rampal and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rampal and 2 Others 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd Adil and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Tejpal Verma and 4 Others vs State of Up and Another

Suresh Yadav vs State of U.P. and Another

Ramesh Singh Tomar (Sasur) and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Vivek Kumar and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Jamunadas and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another