MOHD. AMIR Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has approached this Court for quashing of entire proceedings of ST No.1253 of 2017 arising out of Case Crime No.523 of 2017 (State v. Mohd. Amir), under Section 306 IPC, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow pending in Court of learned Additional District Judge/ Prevention of Corruption Act, Court No.2, Lucknow as well as the Charge-sheet dated 07.08.2017 arising out of abovesaid case crime number and the cognizance order dated 25.08.2017 and its consequential orders on the basis of compromise dated 10.12.2019.

(2.) Brief facts of this case are that the marriage of the petitioner was solemnized with the daughter of opposite party no.2. After some time, differences were arose between them and they got divorce. After divorce, the daughter of opposite party no.2 committed suicide on 31.05.2017. Thereafter, an FIR in Case Crime No.523 of 2017, under Sections 306, 511 IPC, Police Station Thakurganj, District Lucknow was registered on 02.06.2017 by the opposite party no.2 with the allegation that due to unhealthy relationship between husband and wife, the wife poured kerosene oil upon herself and set on fire. During treatment at Balrampur Hospital, Lucknow, she died. Her statement was also recorded by the learned Magistrate in the Hospital. After the death of the deceased, the postmortem was conducted and as per the postmortem report, the cause of death is septicemia due to ante mortem burn injury. After completing the investigation, the Investigating Officer had submitted charge-sheet upon which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance vide order dated 25.08.2017. Later on, both the parties have entered into a compromise on 10.12.2019, which is appended as Annexure-3 to the affidavit.

(3.) It has been submitted by learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has not committed any crime as alleged in the FIR. They are relatives and they do not want to pursue the case further and, therefore, they entered into a compromise outside the court. Learned Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that there is no ingredient of Section 306 IPC available on record against the petitioner to initiate the abovesaid proceedings. The petitioner is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged and the learned Magistrate has committed error while taking cognizance against the petitioner vide order dated 25.08.2017, therefore, the entire proceedings are liable to be quashed. It has also been submitted that both the parties have already entered into a compromise, hence on the basis of compromise the entire proceedings are also liable to be quashed.