Ashutosh Kumar Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:90458

Court No. - 84

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 34263 of 2024

Applicant :- Ashutosh Kumar Gupta And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ram Pravesh Yadav,Shashank Kumar,Vishnu Kesarwani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shamasul Eslam

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Order on Crl. Misc. (Impleadment) Application No. Nil of 2024

¶7

Heard applicants' counsel on impleadment application.

¶8

This impleadment application has been filed on behalf of parents of opposite party No.2, with a prayer to implead the parents and brother of opposite party no.2, in the array of parties.

¶9

It is evident from record that opposite party No.2 is a major, who has solemnized marriage with applicant No.1 and she is about 7 months pregnant from their wedlock.

¶10

Keeping in view the aforesaid facts of the case, the present impleadment application is hereby rejected.

¶11

Order on petition

¶12

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

¶13

The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed to quash the cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Ghazipur on Charge-sheet dated 17.06.2024 bearing Charge-sheet No. A-91 of 2024 registered as Criminal Case No. 0197 of 2024 (State Vs. Ahutosh Kumar Gupta and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 199, 200, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station Muhammadabad, District Ghazipur including the entire proceedings of said case as against the applicants in terms of the compromise dated 12.8.2024 verified on 13.9.2024.

¶14

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that applicant No.1 is husband of opposite party no.2. Opposite party No.2 is major.

¶15

Opposite party No.2 is legally wedded wife of applicant No.1 and they solemnized court marriage on 06.11.2023 before Registrar, Ballia. He further submitted in para 11 of the affidavit that opposite party No.2 is residing with applicant No.1 as his legally wedded wife and performing her matrimonial obligations. He further stated in para 12 that opposite party no.2 is pregnant of about 7 moths. Applicants and opposite party no.2 have amicably settled their dispute out of the Court. Applicant 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 27.11.2024 sent the matter to trial court for verification of the parties and compromise application. Trial court vide order dated 13.09.2024 verified the parties as well as compromise application. 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 private and civil 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.

¶16

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.

¶17

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

¶18

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.

¶19

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.

¶20

Accordingly, the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 15.07.2024 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Ghazipur, registered as Criminal Case No. 0197 of 2024, arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 199, 200, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station Muhammadabad, District Ghazipur, is hereby quashed .

¶21

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

¶22

Order Date :- 27.5.2025 Nitin Verma

¶23

Digitally signed by :- NITIN KUMAR VERMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Ashutosh Kumar Gupta and 2 Others v. State of U.P. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ashutosh Kumar Gupta 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