Allowed

Ranjit Alias Ranjit Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Mar 2024A482/2375/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 323/354 IPC arising from a private dispute. Relying on Supreme Court precedents regarding private nature disputes, the court held that since the parties had amicably settled the dispute outside court, continuing proceedings would be futile.

What did the court decide?

Application to quash impugned charge sheet, summoning order, and entire proceedings of Case No.3259 of 2011 under Sections 323/354 IPC is allowed.

Ranjit Alias Ranjit Kumar Rawat vs State… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:25736

¶2

Court No. - 27

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2375 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ranjit Alias Ranjit Kumar Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Vimlesh Kumar Kashyap Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Dharmendra Kumar Bhatt

¶6

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶7

1. Heard Sri Vimlesh Kumar , the learned counsel for the applicants, Ms. Charu Singh, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Dharmendra Kumar Bhatt, the learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 and 3and perused the record. Short counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for opposite party No.3 is taken on record.

¶8

2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the impugned charge sheet no.61 of 2011, dated 24.06.2011, summoning order dated 29.11.2011 along with the entire proceedings of Case No.3259 of 2011, arising out of Case Crime No.82 of 2011, under Sections 323/354 I.P.C. Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Lucknow on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶9

3. Learned counsel for the parties submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at a compromise. A copy of compromise deed has been placed on record as Annexure-4 to the affidavit filed in support of the application. The learned counsel for the parties have confirmed the terms of compromise.

¶10

4. The learned counsel for the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 does not have any objection, if the impugned proceedings are quashed against the applicant and the opposite party no.2 & 3 supports the application.

¶11

5. Considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is of private nature and it does not affect the public at large and the ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another : (2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab : (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another : (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

¶12

6. In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present application is allowed and proceedings of impugned charge sheet no.61 of 2011, dated 24.06.2011, summoning order dated 29.11.2011 along with the entire proceedings of Case No.3259 of 2011, arising out of Case Crime No.82 of 2011, under Sections 323/354 I.P.C. Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow, pending in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-VII, Lucknow are quashed.

¶13

(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)

¶14

Order Date :- 22.3.2024 Ram.

¶15

Digitally signed by :- RAM SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ranjit Alias Ranjit Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjit Alias Ranjit Kumar Rawat v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Govt. Civil Secrt. 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

Lalit Sharma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Prince Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Civil Sectt. Lko. and 3 Others

Tinku Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko.

U.P. State Road Transport Corporation Tehri Kothi Lucknow vs Govind Prasad S/O Late Kanhiya Lal

Anju Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Chatar Singh vs Sri Jitendra Singh Tomar, Director Agriculture Up, Lko.