Allowed

Manish Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Allahabad HC28 Aug 2024A482/23795/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court quashed criminal proceedings and charge sheet arising from a matrimonial dispute after finding that the parties had amicably settled the matter. Relying on precedent, the Court held that quashing was in the interest of justice as the dispute was private and did not adversely impact society.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of charge sheet dated 26.05.2022 and entire proceedings of Case No. 1352 of 2022.

Manish Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:157397

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23795 of 2024 Applicant :- Manish Yadav And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kant Dubey,Santosh Kumar Dubey

¶4

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Raj Beer Singh,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed by learned counsel for the applicants, in Court today, is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the entire proceedings, including charge sheet dated 26.05.2022, of Case No. 1352 of 2022 (State vs. Manish Yadav and 3 Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 0042 of 2022, under Sections - 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354(A) I.P.C. and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Gautam Buddha Nagar, pending in the court of Civil Judge (J.D.), F.T.C. Court, Gautam Buddh Nagar, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶9

It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicants that applicant no.1 is husband, applicant no.2 is father-in-law, applicant no.3 is mother-in-law and applicant no.4 is brother-in-law (devar) of daughter 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 and the victim do 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,

¶10

copy of which has been annexed along with the supplementary affidavit. It was stated that in view of these facts and circumstances, no useful 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.

¶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, 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.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned charge sheet and entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case against applicants, namely, Manish Yadav, Pappu @ Bijendra Yadav, Bala Rani and Sonu are hereby quashed.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 26.9.2024/S Rawat

¶17

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

Manish Yadav and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manish Yadav and 3 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

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

Rajesh Kumar Mishra vs State of Up and Another

Atul Kumar Shukla vs State of U.P. and Another

Vikas Goel vs State of U.P. and Another

Muntzir vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Kumar Singh vs State of U.P. and Another