Allowed

Gaurav Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC17 Dec 2024A482/2206/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Applicant sought quashing of a charge sheet and summoning order in a matrimonial criminal case after parties reached a compromise verified by the trial court. Citing Supreme Court precedent on inherent powers, the court allowed the application and quashed both.

What did the court decide?

Charge sheet dated 10.12.2018 and summoning order dated 02.02.2019 in Crl. Case No. 4491 of 2019 (Case Crime No. 736 of 2018) were quashed.

Gaurav Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy… — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:84667

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2206 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Gaurav Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Singh,Jay Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pradeep Kumar

¶5

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 2.

¶7

The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 10.12.2018 as well as summoning order dated 02.02.2019 passed in Crl. Case No. 4491 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 736 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submit that in pursuance of the earlier order dated 07.03.2024 passed in Application u/s 482 No. 2206 of 2024, the matter was sent before the court below for verification of the compromise deed.

¶9

It is evident from the record that the factum of the compromise has been verified by the court below vide his report dated 15.04.2024. The compromise deed is appended as Annexure 5 to the application, which goes to show that respondent no. 2 does not want to prosecute the applicant.

¶10

Learned A.G.A. fairly concedes that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below.

¶11

Hon'ble Apex Court, in catena of decisions, viz., Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333 , B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6

¶12

SCC 466 , has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶13

In view of the aforesaid fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

¶14

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed.

¶15

Charge sheet dated 10.12.2018 as well as summoning order dated 02.02.2019 passed in Crl. Case No. 4491 of 2019 arising out of Case Crime No. 736 of 2018, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 498-A I.P.C. and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S. PGI, District Lucknow are hereby quashed.

¶16

Office is directed to send a copy of this order to the court concerned, forthwith.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.12.2024 VKS

¶18

Digitally signed by :- VIVEK KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gaurav Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gaurav Shukla v. State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. 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

Ajay Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Hari Om Srivastava @ Shani and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. (Home Deptt) Lko. and Another

Dashrath Maurya @ Dashrath Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Manas Mohan Rana and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Addl. Chief Secy. Home U.P. Lko. and Another

Gaurav Shukla vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lko. and Another

Sanjay Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another