Allowed

Anees v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Jul 2024A482/21760/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings involving Sections 498-A and 323 IPC. The court held that since the matter arose from a matrimonial dispute, parties had amicably settled the issue, and the compromise was verified by the trial court, there was no useful purpose in continuing the proceedings. The High Court r

What did the court decide?

The impugned summoning order and the entire criminal proceedings against the applicant Anees were quashed.

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

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:151815

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 21760 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Anees Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Anil Kumar Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Janardan Prasad Tripathi

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Janardan Prasad Triapthi, learned counsel for the informant/opposite party no.2, 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 summoning order dated 21.11.2022, of Case No. 2889 of 2022 (State vs. Anees Ahmad and Another), arising out of Case Crime No. 1026 of 2021, under Sections - 498-A, 323 I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Baradari, District - Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-I, Bareilly, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶8

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that applicant is husband 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 also on record. It was stated that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful

¶9

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.

¶10

Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2/informant 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 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.

¶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, criminal proceedings may be quashed on the basis of compromise between the parties. 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 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 criminal case against applicant

¶15

Anees are hereby quashed.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 18.9.2024 S Rawat

¶18

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

Anees v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anees 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

Anand Kumar and 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Jeetu @ Anurag @ 5 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Tahjib and Another vs State of U.P.

Avinash Singh and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankur Tomar and 2 Others vs State of Up and Another

Akeel Ahmad and 9 Others vs State of U.P. and Another