Allowed

Sonu Alias Juned and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC20 Aug 2024A482/7235/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court allowed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS to quash criminal proceedings arising from a grievance of grievance. Relying on cited precedents and noting a verified compromise with bleak conviction chances, the court held no useful purpose would be served by continuing proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The present application is allowed. The entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 235 of 2018, including the Charge Sheet and summoning order, are hereby quashed.

Sonu Alias Juned and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:56445

¶2

Court No. - 13

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7235 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Sonu Alias Juned And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Shailendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶6

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

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "BNSS") has been filed to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 9256 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime No. 235 of 2018 under Section 308, 323, 504 IPC, P.S.-Risiya, District-Bahraich as also the Charge Sheet No. A-187 dated 28.12.2018 including summoning order dated 11.04.2019.

¶8

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 No. 4335 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 10.05.2024 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶9

It appears from the order dated 23.05.2024 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.

¶10

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 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

¶11

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. 235 of 2018, indicated above, are hereby quashed.

¶12

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

¶13

Order Date :- 20.8.2024 Vinay/-

¶14

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

Sonu Alias Juned and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sonu Alias Juned and Others v. State of U.P. Thru. 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

Chandan Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Satyam Shukla Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Ankit Gupta and 2 Others Vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secrt. Lko. and Another

Ram Lali and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, Lko. and Another

Vijay Kumar Pandey and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Bhupendra Kumar Pandey @ Bhupendra Pandey and Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another