Kumar Singh, Ankit Srivastava, Ashwini Kumar Srivastava, Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel v. Sunil and Mangeram)
Case at a glance
Outcome
Quashed
proceedings in question are quashed
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120B, 323, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
Key paragraphs
- Para 99. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9 SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State of M.P. Vs.…
- Para 1010. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed September 25, 2025 D. Tamang (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Judgment
: Anish Kumar Singh, Ankit Srivastava, Ashwini Kumar Srivastava, Sanjay Kumar Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : Anil Kumar Jaiswal, G.A., Shamsher Bahadur Maurya Court No. - 76 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anil Kumar Jaiswal, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
The present application has been filed by applicants for quashing the entire proceeding of Case No.12776 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime No.119 of 2022 (State Versus Sunil and Mangeram), Charge Sheet No.267 of 2022 dated 29.07.2022, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, 506 and 120B IPC, Police Station Transport Nagar, District- Meerut as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 02.08.2022 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No-2, Meerut and entire proceeding of Case No.12384 of 2023 arising out of Case Crime No. 119 of 2022 (State Versus Vipin and Ruhi), charge sheet No.267A of 2022 dated 06.05.2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 323, 504, 506 and 120B IPC, Police Station Transport Nagar, District- Meerut as well as cognizance and summoning order dated 16.05.2023 pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No-2, Meerut, on the basis of compromise dated 14.07.2023.
Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the compromise has already been entered between the parties on 14.7.2023 and the same has been verified by the court concerned on 9.10.2023, therefore, the present 2 A482 No. 34158 of 2023 case be finally decided.
Learned counsel for opposite party no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated by learned counsel for the applicants. He further contended that opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against the applicants and the same may be quashed.
Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal proceedings.
Operative part
Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an outcome of a commercial dispute and there are no such over bearing circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal proceedings in question are quashed.
It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.
In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled between the parties in view of the compromise dated 14.7.2023, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further. 3 A482 No. 34158 of 2023
Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir 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 Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of the aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is, accordingly, allowed September 25, 2025 D. Tamang (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) DHIRENDRA TAMANG High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: proceedings in question are quashed
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 120B, 323, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.