The Additional District Judge dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of proceedings alleging that a marriage settled the case, finding the application frivolous as it was filed at an advanced stage without a formal compromise or proper disclosure of marriage details in prior affidavits.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:189312
Court No. - 81
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 22901 of 2024
Applicant :- Ashok Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Hari Nath Chaubey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Manoj Bajaj,J.
Applicant-Accused has filed this application under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the charge sheet no. 105 of 2019 dated 18.08.2019 as well as the entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 128 of 2019; titled State vs. Ashok, arising out of Case Crime No. 108 of 2019, under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Section 4 Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, Police Station Shivrajpur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending before the Additional District Judge-13/Special Judge (POCSO Act), Kanpur Dehat.
Learned counsel for the applicant-accused has argued that after commission of the alleged offence, he entered into marriage with the victim (daughter of opposite party no. 2), and during trial, the prosecutrix has not supported the case of the prosecution, who was declared hostile. Learned counsel submits that since, the material witness has not supported the case, the continuation of the criminal proceeding is nothing, but an abuse of the process of law, therefore, the same deserves to be
quashed, as the chances of his conviction are extremely bleak. Learned counsel has further drawn the attention of the Court to the affidavit of the prosecutrix sworn on 19th July, 2019 to contend that the prosecutrix has performed marriage with the applicant.
During the course of hearing, it is not disputed by the learned counsel for the applicant that no formal written compromise has been entered into between the parties, much less with the complainant-opposite party no. 2 (father of the prosecutrix). Learned counsel further fairly states that the trial has reached at the advanced stage, as the case is fixed for final arguments, after conclusion of the evidence of both the parties.
Upon hearing the learned counsel and considering his submissions, this Court does not find any merit in this application, as the alleged affidavit sworn by the prosecutrix is dated 19th July, 2019, and the same does not contain the particulars about the alleged marriage between the parties. Para '6' of the affidavit contains an averment that the marriage was performed two years back, but according to the prosecution, the charge sheet against the accused was filed on 18th August, 2019. If, it was a case of marriage, the accused could have pointed out this to the investigating officer, and further there does not appear to be any prudent reason for filing this application at a stage when the trial is nearly over.
Since, the evidence has already been concluded, therefore, this Court is not inclined to exercise the inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., as the prosecutrix or her father have also not supported the stand of the applicant before this Court.
Resultantly, without meaning any expression of opinion on the merits of the case, the application fails and is hereby dismissed.
Order Date :- 3.12.2024 Brijesh
Digitally signed by :- BRIJESH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application for quashing criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. deserves to be allowed despite the advanced stage of the trial and lack of formal compromise.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Ashok
State Of U.P.
Manoj Bajaj
Brijesh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
4 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
