SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Varun Nigam vs State Of U.P. And Anr. on 21 January, 2020

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH

?Court No. – 13

Case :- U/S 482/378/407 No. – 5373 of 2015

Applicant :- Varun Nigam

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

Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Bhatt

Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate,Vinod Kr. Tiwari

Hon’ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.

1. The present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing of the proceedings of Complaint Case No.204 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 494 IPC, Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow.

2. This Court vide order dated 03.11.2015 sent the compromise for verification to the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow. The parties were directed to appear before the Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow for verification within a period of one month.

Order dated 3.11.2015 passed by this Court reads as under:-

“Sri Vinod Kumar Tewari, Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 alongwith Counter Affidavit, the same is taken on record.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned A.G.A. as well as learned Advocate, appearing on behalf of opposite party no. 2.

Learned counsel for petitioners as well as learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 submit that the parties have settled their dispute and have filed written compromise, which is taken on record.

Let written compromise filed by the parties be sent to the Court of Judicial Magistrate II, Lucknow for verification in accordance with law before whom connected Crl. Case No. 204 of 2014 , Smt. Priyanka vs. Varun Nigam and another , under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C Police Station Gudumba, district Lucknow, is pending. The Judicial Magistrate II, Lucknow shall verify the compromise and shall send the same alongwith report positively on the next date of listing.

Parties shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate II, Lucknow for verification within period of one month.

List on 17.12.2015 for orders.

Till next date of listing, no coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner Varun Nigam in pursuance of Crl. Case No. 204 of 2014 , Smt. Priyanka vs. Varun Nigam and another , under sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 494 I.P.C Police Station Gudumba, district Lucknow. ”

3. In compliance of the aforesaid order passed by this Court, learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow has submitted a report dated 28.01.2016 verifying the compromise entered into between the parties which has been sent to this Court by Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow.

4. The parties were present before the learned Magistrate and after satisfying with the compromise to be genuine and both the parties have put their signatures with their respective counsels, compromise was verified by the learned Judicial Magistrate-II.

5. This case has been taken up in the revised call, however, despite the matter having been taken in the revised call, no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent No.2. In para 5 of the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No.2, it has been specifically said that all the dispute between the petitioner and respondent No.2/complainant have got settled and she has no objection if the impugned proceedings of Complaint Case No.204 of 2014 pending the Court of Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 394 IPC are quashed.

6. Considering the report of the learned Judicial Magistrate-II regarding verification of the compromise entered into between the parties and the stand of the complainant/respondent No.2 in her counter affidavit, it would be appropriate to quash the proceedings considering the nature of dispute being matrimonial in nature and judgments of the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the proceedings would be an exercise in futility.

7. This petition is allowed and the impugned proceedings of Complaint Case No.204 of 2014 pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate-II, Lucknow under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 494 IPC, Police Station Gudamba, District Lucknow are quashed.

Order Date :- 21.1.2020

prateek

 

 

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