Ishaq and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74621

Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 16376 of 2024

Applicant :- Ishaq And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Singh,Syed Wajid Ali Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Syed Mohammed Jafer Husain,Vivek Pratap Singh

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Supplementary affidavit filed today on behalf of the applicants, is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned counsel for the informant, and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶8

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the charge-sheet dated 13.12.2019, cognizance order dated 17.12.2019 as well as to quash the entire proceeding of S.T. No.313 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.285 of 2019 (State vs. I(shak and others), under sections 323/34, 325/34, 308/34, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, P.C. Ist, Bareilly.

¶9

It is alleged in the FIR that the informant was standing outside his house when named accused persons assaulted the informant. Injured received injuries. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the informant has received injures but injuries are simple in nature. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicants and opposite party no.2 (informant) amicably settled the dispute out of Court and entered into compromise. Thereafter, they filed this Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. with prayer that since parties have amicably settled the dispute out of Court, therefore, the proceedings pending against the applicants be quashed in terms of compromise. Hon'ble Court by order dated 17.05.2024 directed the parties to appear before the trial court and trial court is directed to verify the parties as well as compromise deed dated 05.03.2024. Parties appeared before the trial court and parties were verified through their counsels and compromise deed was also verified, therefore, verification report dated 28.05.2024 is filed, the same is on record. He next submitted that since parties have compromised the matter, therefore, the proceeding pending

¶10

against the applicants be quashed and opposite party no.2 (informant) does not want to pursue the case further.

¶11

Learned counsel appearing for the opposite party no.2 does not dispute the correctness of the submission made by learned counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the documents relied upon by him. He submits that opposite party no. 2 has no objection, if the proceedings in the aforesaid case are quashed.

¶12

Learned AGA submitted that both the parties have settled their dispute out of the Court, hence, no reason to proceed further.

¶13

The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir @ Parbatbhai Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC, 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayanan (2019) 5 SCC 688, wherein Hon'ble Apex Court has categorically held that compromise can be made between the parties even in respect of certain cognizable and noncompoundable offences. Reference may also be made to the decision given by this Court in Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. and another [2013 (83) ACC 278] , in which, law expounded by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the aforesaid cases has been explained in detail.

¶14

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, as noted herein above, and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, this Court is of the considered opinion that no useful purpose would be served by prolonging the proceedings of the above mentioned case.

¶15

Accordingly, the impugned charge-sheet dated 13.12.2019, cognizance order dated 17.12.2019 as well as to quash the entire proceeding of S.T. No.313 of 2021 arising out of Case Crime No.285 of 2019 (State vs. I(shak and others), under sections 323/34, 325/34, 308/34, 504 I.P.C., Police Station Bithri Chainpur, District Bareilly, pending in the court of Additional District & Sessions Judge, P.C. Ist, Bareilly, is hereby quashed.

¶16

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is accordingly allowed.

¶17

Order Date :- 8.5.2025 SKD

¶18

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ishaq and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ishaq and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases