Allowed

Vivek Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Allahabad HC9 Sept 2024A482/8038/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court quashed criminal proceedings instituted under Sections 409 and 420 IPC. The application, filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., was allowed based on a verified compromise between the private complainants and the applicants, where the former agreed not to prosecute further.

What did the court decide?

The entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 28359/2022 (State v. Vandana Yadav & Ors.) instituted under Sections 409 and 420 IPC were quashed.

Vivek Yadav and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:69433

¶2

Court No. - 28

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8038 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Vivek Yadav And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Nadeem Murtaza,Harsh Vardhan Kediya,Snigdha Singh

¶5

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Atul Chandel,Kartikeya Yadav,Sunil Kumar Singh,Yuvraj Singh

¶6

Hon'ble Brij Raj Singh,J.

¶7

Heard Sri Nadeem Murtaza learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Sunil Kumar Singh learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, learned A.G.A. and perused the record.

¶8

This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 28359/2022 (State v. Vandana Yadav & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 896 of 2021,under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), pending in the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-CBI (AP), Lucknow.

¶9

In pursuance of the order dated 09.09.2024, the applicants as well as the opposite party No.2 appeared before the Senior Registrar for verification of contents of compromise executed between the applicants and opposite party No.2.

¶10

Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court vide report dated 18.09.2024.

¶11

It is evident from the record that the contents of the compromise were verified by the Senior Registrar on 18.09.2024. It is also evident that the compromise is available on record as annexure No. 6, which reveals that the opposite party No.2 does not want to prosecute the applicants.

¶12

Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the Senior Registrar of this Court .

¶13

Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab,(2014) 6 SCC 466 . Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶14

In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶15

For the discussions made above, the application is allowed and the entire criminal proceedings of Case No. 28359/2022 (State v. Vandana Yadav & Ors.), arising out of Case Crime No. 896 of 2021,under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, Police Station- Gomti Nagar, District- Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), pending in the Court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-CBI (AP),

¶16

Lucknow is hereby quashed.

¶17

Order Date :- 15.10.2024 dk/

¶18

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

Vivek Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vivek Yadav and Another v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home 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

Asharam Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and Another

Nand Lal Prasad and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Irrigation Dept. Lko. and 2 Others

Amrendra Kumar Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Secy. Lko. and Another

Raja Ram vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Civil Sectt. Lko and Another

Vivek Yadav and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another

Vivek Yadav and 4 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko and Another