Allowed

Ram Vriksha and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC17 Oct 2023/5290/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. based on a verified mutual compromise between the parties. The Court held that since the matter was purely personal and settled, no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings, and thus exercised inherent power to quash the case.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings of S.T. No.49 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.169 of 2014 are quashed.

Ram Vriksha and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:68276

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5290 of 2023

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Vriksha And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others

¶5

Counsel for Applicant :- Sanjay Kumar Singh,Pramod Kumar Singh

¶6

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Subhash Singh

¶7

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the private respondents and perused the record.

¶9

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of S.T. No.49 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.169 of 2014 U/s 147, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for private respondents jointly submitted that vide order dated 23.12.2022 a direction was given to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned trial court had verified the contents of compromise.

¶11

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for private respondents jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the trial court vide report/order dated 13.03.2023.

¶12

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

¶13

Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in 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 466. 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 and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶15

For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and entire proceedings of S.T. No.49 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No.169 of 2014 U/s 147, 308, 323, 325, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Baskhari, District- Ambedkar Nagar are hereby quashed .

¶16

Office is directed to communicate this order to trial court forthwith.

¶17

Order Date :- 17.10.2023 Arpan

¶18

Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Vriksha and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Vriksha and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

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

Avinash Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lucknow and 3 Others

Akbar and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin.Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Renu Rai @ Soni Pandey Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addil. Chief Secy. Deptt. Home Lok Bhawan Civil Secrt. Lko. and 2 Others

Amar Jeet Yadav and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Deptt and Other

Mohd. Aziz and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Govt. U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Dr. Nirmal Kumar Gupta Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Lko and Another