Allowed

Santosh Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Jul 2023/2114/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Criminal appeal filed to quash proceedings under SC/ST Act and IPC based on a verified compromise deed. Court relied on precedents allowing quashing of criminal proceedings upon settlement and allowed the appeal to quash charge-sheet, summoning order, and entire proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Quashed charge-sheet dated 22.05.1995, summoning order dated 24.11.1995, and entire proceedings of Special Sessions Trial No. 1354/2000 arising out of case crime No. 142 of 1995.

Santosh Kumar and Another Vs State of U.P… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:47622

¶2

Court No. - 29

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2114 of 2023

¶4

Appellant :- Santosh Kumar And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another

¶5

Counsel for Appellant :- Nagendra Singh,Kuldeep Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶6

Hon'ble Mrs. Renu Agarwal,J.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for opposite party No. 2 and learned AGA for the State.

¶8

The present criminal appeal has been filed under Section 14(A)(1) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 to quash the impugned summoning order dated 24.11.1995 passed by learned Special Judge SC/ST Act, Lucknow, charge-sheet dated 22.05.1995 and the entire proceeding of Special Sessions Trial No. 1354/2000 arising out of case crime No. 142 of 1995, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, police station-Mohanlalganj, District-Lucknow by means of which the appellants have been summoned for facing the trial under Section 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Section 3(1)X SC/ST Act including the entire consequential proceedings thereof in terms of the compromise dated 21.02.2023.

¶9

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submit that in pursuance of the earlier order dated 13.04.2023, the matter was sent before the court below for verification of the compromise deed.

¶10

It is evident from the record that the factum of the compromise has been verified by the court below vide his report dated 28.04.2023. The compromise deed is appended as

¶11

Annexure 5 to the application, which goes to show that respondent no. 2 does not want to prosecute the appellants.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. fairly concedes that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the court below.

¶13

Hon'ble Apex Court, in catena of decisions, viz., Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 46 6, has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further and the matter has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter any further.

¶15

For the discussions made above, the present appeal is allowed.

¶16

Charge sheet dated 22.05.1995, summoning order dated 24.11.1995 passed in Special Sessions Trial No. 1354/2000 arising out of case crime No. 142 of 1995, under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)(X) of SC/ST Act, police station-Mohanlalganj, District-Lucknow as well as entire proceedings of Case No. 142 of 1995 are hereby quashed .

¶17

(Renu Agarwal,J.)

¶18

Order Date :- 20.7.2023 Karan

¶19

Digitally signed by :- KUMAR KARAN RAO High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Santosh Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Santosh Kumar and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Juvenile 'X' Thru. His Father Shri Narendra Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko.

Dhruv Bharti and Ors. Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lucknow and Anr.

Aditya Kumar @ Aditya Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sameer Siddiqui @ Cheenu and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko and Another

Ruchika Chaurasiya and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko and Another

Smt. Suyashi Jaiswal Vs Shri Ajay Jaiswal and Another