Allowed

Ali Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC5 Sept 2024/7899/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings under Sections 147, 148, 323, 504, and 452 of IPC following a verified compromise. Relying on established precedents and observing bleak conviction prospects, the court allowed the application and terminated the case.

What did the court decide?

The entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 337/2020, including the Charge Sheet and summoning order, are quashed.

Ali Husain and Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:61025

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7899 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Ali Husain And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Satyendra Nath Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

Sri Abhinav Srivastava, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party no. 2 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 has been filed to quash the entire proceedings Criminal Case No. 1150 of 2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 337/2020 under Section 147, 148, 323, 504, 452 IPC, P.S.-Dhammaur, District-Sultanpur as well as Charge Sheet dated 17.01.2021 and summoning order dated 24.05.2021.

¶9

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 No. 6297 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 18.07.2024 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶10

It appears from the order dated 30.07.2024 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.

¶11

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 Ramgopal 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

¶12

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 as also taking note of 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. Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 337/2020, indicated above, are hereby quashed.

¶13

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

¶14

Order Date :- 5.9.2024 Vinay/-

¶15

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

Ali Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ali Husain and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Its 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sandeep Kumar Gautam Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Mohan Lal and 3 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Arvind @ Arvind Tiwari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Srvesh and Others vs Shri Masoom Ali Sarwar, M.D., U.P. State Road Transport Corporation, Lko.

Sachendra @ Satendra Bajpai and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and Another

Shyam Pal Singh and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another