Amresh Kumar Singh v. the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC11 Dec 2024A482/11239/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court heard an application under Section 482 CrPC/528 BNSS seeking quashing of criminal proceedings due to a settlement and victim's unwillingness to prosecute. The matter was adjourned with proceedings stayed until 17.01.2025.

What did the court decide?

Impugned proceedings stayed until further order.

What the court decided

Amresh Kumar Singh vs the State of U.P. Thru… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Court No. - 13

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11239 of 2024

¶3

Applicant :- Amresh Kumar Singh Opposite Party :- The State Of U.P. Thru. The Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Verma,Ajay Kumar Rai,Akhilendra Pratap Singh,Suraj Kumar,Vinod Kumar Yadav Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sanjay Mishra

¶4

Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

Heard.

¶7

The instant application has been filed by the applicant with following prayer:-

¶8

"(i) Allow the petition of the petitioner u/s 528 BNSS earlier U/S-482 Cr.P.C. and quash the impugned chargesheet dated 05.02.2024 and impugned summoning and cognizance order dated 15.02.2024 arising out of case registered at Case Crime No. 200 of 2023, U/S376(2)/323/504/506/354 IPC & Section 66-E of I.T. Act, PS- Alambagh, District- Lucknow (annexed as Annexure Nos. 1 & 2 respectively).

¶9

(ii) Quash the entire criminal proceedings pending in Hon'ble Court of F.T.C- I, Lucknow being State v. Amresh Kumar Singh having S.T No. 583/2024 registered against Case Crime No. 200 of 2023, U/S376(2)/323/504/506/354 IPC & Section 66-E of I.T. Act, PS- Alambagh, District- Lucknow.

¶10

(iii) Quash the entire criminal proceedings pending in Hon'ble Court of F.T.C-I, Lucknow being State v. Amresh Kumar Singh having S.T No. 583/2024 registered against Case Crime No. 200 of 2023, U/S376(2)/323/504/506/354 IPC & Section 66-E of I.T. Act, PS- Alambagh, District- Lucknow in light of the compromise entered between the Petitioner and Victim."

¶11

In pursuance of earlier order dated 11.12.2024, the parties are present today before this Court.

¶12

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that it is admitted case of the prosecution that at the time of alleged incident, the applicant and the victim were major and they were in affairs. Therefore, due to some dispute arose between them, the F.I.R. of the case in question was lodged. He further submits that the victim does not want to prosecute the applicant and the issue has been resolved between the parties by way of settlement agreement, hence, indulgence of this Court is required.

¶13

The victim categorically states that due to some differences, the F.I.R. was lodged by her, but now she does not want to prosecute the applicant.

¶14

Learned A.G.A. opposes the prayer of applicant and submits that after detailed investigation, the charge-sheet was submitted. However, he does not dispute the fact that in her statement recorded u/s 164 Cr.P.C., the victim has admitted that she visited the alleged hotel on the request of the applicant.

¶15

Considering the submissions of learned counsel for parties and going through the contents of application as well as other relevant documents, it is evident that the victim and the applicant are major and prudent persons. The victim has herself stated that she does not want to prosecute the applicant. In such circumstances, the matter requires consideration.

¶16

List this case on 17.01.2025.

¶17

Until further order, the impugned proceedings shall remain stayed.

¶18

The parties need not to appear before this Court until further order.

¶19

Order Date :- 18.12.2024 Arpan

¶20

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

Amresh Kumar Singh v. the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Amresh Kumar Singh v. the State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Shiv Prasad Kori vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Raman Sahni vs State of U.P. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko

Vinay Kumar Alias Pawan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Meera Srivastava vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Jitendra Saroj vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Ministry of Home Deptt. Lko. and Others

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