Satyaprakash and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72231

Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25857 of 2024

Applicant :- Satyaprakash And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhinav Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- Shailendra Kumar Tripathi,G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the Charge Sheet dated 12.01.2024, Cognizance/Summoning order dated 12.02.2024 as well as the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 368 of 2024 (State Vs. Satyaprakash and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 452, 308 IPC, Police Station- Indergarh, District- Kannauj, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj.

¶8

It is argued that both the parties have lodged first information reports against each other on account of dispute arose on parking of tractor. Both the parties received injuries in the alleged incident, which are grievous in nature as per the medical examination report. During trial, applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court and entered into a compromise, thereafter, Applicants approached this Hon'ble Court by filing this 482 application with prayer to quash the proceedings on terms of compromise entered between the parties, the Hon'ble Court vide order dated 12.12.2024 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 07.01.2025 verified the parties as well as compromise deed through their counsels. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 compromised the matter and opposite party No.2 does not want to proceed the matter against the applicants. He further submitted that applicants and opposite party no.2 have settled through compromise their dispute and as such opposite party no.2 does not wish to press the aforesaid case against the applicants. Opposite party no.2 is ready to withdraw the prosecution of the applicants and in view of the compromise, no fruitful purpose would be served if the prosecution is allowed to go on.

¶9

In para 11, it is stated that present case is a cross case, applicant No.1 has lodged FIR as Case Crime No. 330 of 2023, under Sections 308, 323, 325, 452, 504, 506 IPC, against the informant/opposite party no. 2 and others in which both parties have compromised the matter and has filed 482 Cr.P.C. application bearing No. 14308 of 2024 to quash the criminal proceedings on account of compromise. The Court by order dated 02.05.2024 has directed the parties to

¶10

appear before trial court. Counsel submits that parties have been verified in those proceedings.

¶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 non-compoundable 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 12.01.2024, Cognizance/Summoning order dated 12.02.2024 as well as the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 368 of 2024 (State Vs. Satyaprakash and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 333 of 2023, under Sections 323, 504, 452, 308 IPC, Police Station- Indergarh, District- Kannauj, pending in the Court of Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division)/Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kannauj, are hereby quashed.

¶16

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

¶17

Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Aditya

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ADITYA KUSHWAHA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Satyaprakash and 3 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satyaprakash and 3 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