Allowed

Prabhat Verma and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Others

Allahabad HC2 Jul 2024/5845/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to quash criminal proceedings. The court quashed the case based on a verified compromise entered into between the applicants and the State, noting that no further purpose would be served by keeping the matter pending.

What did the court decide?

Entire criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise are hereby quashed.

Prabhat Verma and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Cheque Dishonour | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:44879

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5845 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Prabhat Verma And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Kanaujia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Tufail Ahmad

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Tufail Ahmad, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party nos. 2 to 7 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record.

¶7

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

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief(s):-

¶9

"Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quashed entire criminal proceedings on the basis of compromise of Criminal Case No. 5674 of 2021 State versus Prabhat Verma & Others as well as Charge Sheet No. 939 of 2020 dated 8.11.2020 arising out of Case Crime No. 1103 of 2020, Under Section 323, 504, 506, 452, 427 of I.P.C. registered in Police Station -Kotwali Sadar, DistrictLakhimpur Kheri, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lakhimpur Kheri, contained herein as Annexure No 1 and 2 to this petition."

¶10

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 3009 of 2023 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide order dated 31.03.2023 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶11

It appears from the order/report dated 02.02.2024 that the court concerned has verified the compromise, mentioning therein that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels before the court.

¶12

For the relief(s) sought, on the basis of compromise, the learned counsel for the applicants has placed reliance on the judgments of the Apex Court in the case of Romgopal and others Vs.

¶13

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 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 .

¶14

Learned Additional Government Advocate could not dispute the fact that the compromise has been entered into between the parties and now the opposite party nos. 2 to 7 do not want to proceed with the proceedings in issue.

¶15

Considering the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the order/report of trial Court dated 02.02.2024 as also taking note of the observations made by Hon'ble Apex Court in the judgments, referred above, and the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that no purpose would be served in keeping the proceedings pending before the trial court and hence, entire proceedings in issue are hereby quashed in terms of the compromise.

¶16

Accordingly, the present application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed in above terms.

¶17

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to concerned Court forthwith.

¶18

Order Date :- 2.7.2024 Arun/-

¶19

Digitally signed by :- ARUN KUMAR GANGWAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Prabhat Verma 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?

Prabhat Verma 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

X (Minor) Thru His Mother Z vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Sumit Awasthi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Dharamraj vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mohd. Salman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Ministry Home Lko. and Another

Ranjay Kumar Mishra and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lucknow and Another

Suman Vs the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another