The court quashed criminal proceedings arising from a compromise between parties, relying on Supreme Court precedents allowing quashing in such circumstances.
Criminal Case No.43688 of 2022 is quashed.
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-LKO:29571
Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3419 of 2024
Applicant :- Mukesh Jain Alias Baua Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Lalit Kishore Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Pawan Kumar Mishra, Advocate who has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party No.2, which is taken on record, and learned A.G.A.
By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. the applicant has sought quashing of the Criminal Case No.43688 of 2022 arising out of Case No.243 of 2021 under Sections 504, 506, 354, 452 IPC, Police Station Chowk, Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the parties have amicable settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise which is on record. Coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 19.10.2023 passed in Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No.10382 of 2023 directed the compromise to be verified by the learned Court below.
In compliance of the order passed by this Court, Court below vide order dated 21.10.2023 verified the compromise. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 concedes the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant.
Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in 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 State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.
In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified by court below and the verification report dated 10.1.2022 is on record as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases (supra), the present petition is allowed and the criminal proceedings (supra) are hereby quashed.
Order Date :- 12.4.2024 prateek
Digitally signed by :- PRATEEK ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed in view of the compromise between the parties and the law laid down by the Supreme Court?
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
B. S. Joshi v. State of HaryanaRelied on¶10
B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675 · Who else cites this
Nikhil Merchant v. C.B.I.Relied on¶10
Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677 · Who else cites this
Manoj Sharma v. StateRelied on¶10
Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1 · Who else cites this
Gian Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶10
Gian Singh versus State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 · Who else cites this
Narinder Singh v. State of PunjabRelied on¶10
Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Mukesh Jain Alias Baua
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Secrt. Lko.
Another
Karunesh Singh Pawar
As recorded by the court registry
2 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
