Allowed

Pankaj Katira and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC12 Sept 2024A482/24416/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a matrimonial dispute, the Allahabad High Court quashed the charge-sheet, cognizance order, and entire criminal proceedings under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506 IPC and D.P. Act after the parties filed a verified compromise before the trial court, citing lack of societal impact and interest of justice.

What did the court decide?

The impugned charge-sheet, cognizance order dated 08.08.2019, and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 371 of 2019 are quashed.

Pankaj Katira and 3 Others vs State of Up and… — Matrimonial and Divorce | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:148900

¶2

Court No. - 76

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 24416 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Pankaj Katira And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Jai Raj Counsel for Opposite Party :- Kshitij Ram Dubey,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 counsel for opposite party no.2/informant, 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 06.06.2019 and cognizance order dated 08.08.2019, of Criminal Case No. 371 of 2019 (State vs. Pankaj Katira and Others), arising out of Case Crime No. 108 of 2018, under Sections - 498-A, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C and Section - 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station - Mahila Thana, District - Agra, pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Agra, 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 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

¶10

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 has been annexed 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 counsel for the opposite party no.2/informant has concurred with the arguments of learned counsel for the applicants 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.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has no objection if parties compromise the matter.

¶13

I have considered the submissions and perused the record.

¶14

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 informant does not want to proceed with the case against the applicants. 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

¶15

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.

¶16

In view of the aforesaid, the impugned charge-sheet/cognizance order and entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case against applicants, namely, Pankaj Katira, Shiv Katira, Smt. Kanta Katira @ Laxmi Kanta and Himanshu are hereby quashed.

¶17

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

¶18

Order Date :- 12.9.2024 S Rawat

¶19

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

Pankaj Katira and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pankaj Katira and 3 Others v. State of Up 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

Ashkar Hussain and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankur Goyal and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Lokpal Alias Abhishek Yadav vs State of U.P.and Anothers

Chandrabhan Bind and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Rampal Yadav and 2 Others vs State of U.P. and Another

Kapur Chandra Singh and 3 Others vs State of U.P. and Another