SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Aashutosh Vashistha @Aashutosh … vs State Of U.P. And Anr on 9 January, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 41120 of 2019

Applicant :- Aashutosh Vashistha @Aashutosh And 2 Ors

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Anr

Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Prakash Singh Kushwaha

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Bheem Singh

Connected With

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 42493 of 2017

Applicant :- Smt. Swati And 2 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another

Counsel for Applicant :- Bheem Singh

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Compromise verification reports annexed with the supplementary affidavits filed today in both the matters are taken on record.

Application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. No. 41120 of 2019 has been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 20.01.2018 as well as entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 484 of 2018, arsing out of Case Crime No. 206 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Pahasu, District Bulandshahr as well as connected Application u/s 482 No. 42493 of 2017 has been filed by the applicants to quash the summoning order dated 22.02.2017 as well as entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 9614 of 2016, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Soron, District Kasganj, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj.

Since both the aforesaid applications u/s 482 Cr.P.C. arise out of a same nature of cases, both the cases appears to be cross cases and parties therein belong to the same family, they are being disposed of / decided by a common order.

Heard Shri Vijay Prakash Singh Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Bheem Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and learned AGA for the State in application u/s 482 No. 41120 of 2019 and Shri Bheem Singh, learned counsel for the applicants and learned AGA for the State in application u/s 42493 of 2017.

Referring to the supplementary affidavits filed today, learned counsel for the applicants submit that vide order dated 22.11.2019, parties were directed to appear before the court concerned to verify the compromise entered into between them. It is further submitted that in compliance of the said order parties appeared before the court below and compromise entered into between the parties was verified and courts below prepared verification reports which are annexed with the supplementary affidavits filed today. It is further submitted that all the disputes and differences have been settled between the parties. At this stage, learned counsel further submitted that continuation of the proceedings of the aforesaid cases will be an abuse of process of law. No fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicants has also placed reliance on the law laid down by Apex Court in Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2012), 10 SCC 303, B.S. Joshi and others vs. State of Haryana and another, (2003) 4 SCC 675 and Madan Mohan Abbot vs. State of Punjab, (2008) 4 SCC 582.

On the other hand, learned AGA as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 could not dispute the aforesaid facts.

I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire record.

In all the aforesaid cases, the Apex Court has laid down the law that criminal proceedings may be quashed even in non-compoundable cases by the High Court in exercise of its extraordinary jurisdiction to restore peace between the parties and in case the justice so demands. According to Hon’ble Supreme Court, if the offence involve private dispute between the parties of commercial nature or matrimonial dispute and it is not related to heinous offence, the proceedings may be quashed.

Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably and mutually settled in both the matters, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal cases pending before the trial court and it would simply be a waste of time if the aforesaid cases are permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

In view of the above, both the applications u/s 482 Cr.P.C. are allowed.

Entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 484 of 2018, arsing out of Case Crime No. 206 of 2017, under Sections 498-A, 406 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Pahasu, District Bulandshahr as well as Complaint Case No. 9614 of 2016, under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Soron, District Kasganj, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj against the applicants are quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties in both the cases.

Order Date :- 9.1.2020

Sanjeet

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2020 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation
×

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation