Allowed

Mohd. Imran Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Allahabad HC26 Jul 2024/3450/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The applicant sought quashing of charge sheet and summoning order under Section 482 CrPC. Noting a voluntary settlement agreement reached via mediation, the Court, relying on settled precedents, quashed the proceedings as conviction was unlikely.

What did the court decide?

The charge sheet no. 01 of 2021 and the summoning order dated 06.04.2022 read with all proceedings arising thereout including F.I.R. No. 0840 of 2021 are quashed.

Mohd. Imran Khan Vs State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:50912

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3450 of 2022

¶4

Applicant :- Mohd. Imran Khan

¶5

Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And Another

¶6

Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Kirti Mishra,Dharmesh Kumar Dwivedi,Shashank Kumar Shukla,Yogesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Ram Singh,Ramkripal Yadav

¶7

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶8

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.

¶9

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with Section 528 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS") has been filed with the following prayer:-

¶10

"(i) To quash the impugned charge sheet no. 01 of 2021 dated 31.12.2021 U/S 420, 504, 506, 447, 419 IPC at Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, District- Sultanpur as well as summoning order dated 06.04.2022 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.16, Sultanpur as for as it relates to applicant as stated in Annexure No.1 & 2 respectively to this Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C."

¶11

It appears that on the basis of the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide its order dated 17.08.2023 referred the matter to Mediation Centre of this Court so as to carve out possibility of amicable settlement of dispute between the parties.

¶12

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT before Mediation Centre of this Court between applicant and opposite party No. 2/ Nisar Ahmad indicates that on 21.03.2024, the parties have settled the dispute amicably and entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels.

¶13

Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Romgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2022 (1) SCJ 536, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State

¶14

of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, and also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence, no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

¶15

Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of F.I.R./ Case Crime No. 0840 of 2021, indicated above, are hereby quashed .

¶16

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

¶17

Order Date :- 26.7.2024 Gurpreet Singh

¶18

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

Mohd. Imran Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Imran Khan v. State of U.P. Thru. A.C.S. / Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home 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

Vijay Kumar Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Govt. Lko. and Another

Narottam Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Juvenile X Criminal Case No. 60/2022, Thru. His Father and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

Jumman Khan and 15 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 6 Others

Anuj Pandey and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Kalpana Chaturvedi Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy. Home Lko and Anr.