SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Umesh Tomar vs State Of U.P. And Another on 9 January, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. – 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 37894 of 2019

Applicant :- Umesh Tomar

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Kesari

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitin Raj Singh,Raj Singh

Connected With

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 8020 of 2018

Applicant :- Dharmveer Singh And Another

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh,Virendra Kumar Jaiswal

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

AND

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 32560 of 2019

Applicant :- Umesh Tomar

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Raj Kumar Kesari

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Nitin Raj Singh,Raj Singh

Hon’ble Om Prakash-VII,J.

Heard Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicants, Shri Nitin Raj Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 as well as learned AGA for the State.

The application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No. 37894 of 2019 has been filed by the applicant with the prayer to quash the impugned order dated 14.07.2017 as well as entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1442 of 2016 (Nisha alias Simran Vs. Umesh Tomar), under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar and in the connected applications u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has also been filed by the applicants with the prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 216 of 2017 in S.T. No. 336 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 25 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

Opposite party no. 2 Nisha @ Simran is present in person and she is identified by her counsel Shri Nitin Raj Singh, Advocate.

On query made by the Court, she stated that dispute pending between the parties have been settled. She has received Rs. 7,00,000/- before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre. A Demand Draft bearing No. 596047 of Rs. 7,00,000/- has also been received by her today before the Court. She further stated that she has no objection, if the applications are allowed and entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal cases are quashed.

Referring to the aforesaid facts, learned counsel for the applicants states that since dispute pending between the parties have been settled, both the parties have parted their ways, amount agreed before the Mediation and Conciliation Centre have been paid, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. In support of his contention, learned counsel for the applicant 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 counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled, opposite party no.2 has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid cases pending before the trial court is quashed.

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, 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 case is permitted to continue till its logical conclusion.

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

The entire proceedings of Complaint Case No. 1442 of 2016 (Nisha alias Simran Vs. Umesh Tomar), under Section 406 IPC, Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar and Criminal Case No. 216 of 2017 in S.T. No. 336 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 25 of 2016, under Sections 498-A, 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC and Section 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Gautam Budh Nagar against the applicants are quashed in terms of compromise arrived at between the parties.

Order Date :- 9.1.2020

Sanjeet

 

 

Leave a Reply

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

Copyright © 2021 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