Romi Shukla and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:49095

Court No. - 13

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6349 of 2024

Applicant :- Romi Shukla And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. And Others Counsel for Applicant :- Anoop Kumar Upadhyay Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Shesh Mani Dubey, learned Advocates has filed their Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos.2 and 3, which is taken on record.

¶7

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Shesh Mani Dubey, learned Counsel for opposite party nos.2 and 3, learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. read with under Section 528 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (in short "BNSS") has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶9

"The petitioners named above most respectfully beg to submit that for the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Case No. 767/2023, 'State Vs Romi Shukla & others', pending before the court of Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda, as well as Charge-sheet No. 23507/2023, dated 03.07.2023, under sections 147, 148, 342, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda, and Summoning order dated 14.12.2023, passed by Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda, arising out of F.I.R./Case Crime No. 0334/2022, under sections 147, 148, 342, 307, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station Kotwali Nagar, District Gonda, on the basis of compromise between the parties which was duly verified by the Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gonda vide order dated 27.05.2024, through Annexure no.7 to this affidavit, in pursuance of order dated 09.05.2024, passed by this Hon'ble High Court in A-482 No. 4283/2024, 'Romi Shukla & others Vs State of U.P. & another'."

¶10

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 4283 of 2024 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated 09.05.2024 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 dated 27.05.2024 (Annexure No.7) that the trial court

¶12

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.

¶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 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 , 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. Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings of Case No. 767/2023, 'State Vs Romi Shukla & others , indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed.

¶14

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

¶15

Order Date :- 22.7.2024

¶16

Jyoti/-

¶17

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

Romi Shukla 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?

Romi Shukla 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?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ajamal Hasan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ankur Verma Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Sectt. Lko and Another

Naveen Kumar @ Naveen and Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Mohd. Shaqib Khan @ Shaqib and 5 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Raj Rastogi @ Jagdamba Prasad Rastogi vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt., Lko.

Arun Kumar Shukla and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another