Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 83953 (ALL)

VIPIN PANDEY v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

A482/25441/2024 · 2025-03-10

Vinod Diwakar

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:36033 Court No. - 76 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 25441 of 2024 Applicant :- Vipin Pandey Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Renu Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Pankaj Pandey Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the entire record. 2. The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 02.04.2024 and charge sheet dated 23.2.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 190 of 2024 titles State vs. Vipin Pandey, arising out of Case No. 190 of 2024, under Section 384 IPC and 67 IT Act, P.S. Jigna, District Mirzapur, pending in the court of learned ACJM/C.J(S.D.) FTC Mirzapur, on the basis of a compromise. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that since the parties had settled their dispute outside the court and compromised the matter on 4.1.2025. It is further submitted that since parties have settled the dispute, opposite party no.2 does not want to proceed with trial, therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. submits that since the dispute between the parties has been settled and opposite party no.2 has no objection, therefore, the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the trial court is quashed. 5. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and have gone through the entire record. 6. Since the dispute between the parties has been amicably settled, no fruitful purpose would be served by permitting to continue the criminal case pending before the trial court and it would simply a waste of judicial time as chances of conviction are very bleak. 7. In such circumstances, the impugned cognizance/summoning order dated 02.04.2024 and charge sheet dated 23.2.2024 as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 190 of 2024 titles State vs. Vipin Pandey, arising out of Case No. 190 of 2024, under Section 384 IPC and 67 IT Act, P.S. Jigna, District Mirzapur, pending in the court of learned ACJM/C.J(S.D.) FTC Mirzapur, against the applicant, is hereby quashed. 8. The instant petition stands allowed, accordingly. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Ujjawal Justice Vinod Diwakar Digitally signed by :- UJJAWAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad