Mohd. Salman Qureshi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secretiate Lko. and 1 Others

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7729

Court No. - 12

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1116 of 2025

Applicant :- Mohd. Salman Qureshi And 2 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secretiate Lko. And 1 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Santosh Kumar Tripathi,Hem Narayan Sharma 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 perused the record.

¶7

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for the following main relief (s) :-

¶8

"Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed that this Honible Coust may kindly be pleased to quash the proceeding of Case No 44920/2024 Crime No. 41/2023 State V/s Mohd. Salman Quarishi and others U/s- 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 406 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-Mahila Thana, District-Lucknow, on the basis of report/order dated 03.12.2024 as contained in Annexure No.-1 with this petition. which is pending before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) F.T.C. (Crime against women) Lucknow."

¶9

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No.9211 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 06.11.2024 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 03.12.2024 (Annexure No.1) that the trial court 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 State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv

¶12

Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435 , according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, 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 , according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the 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.

¶13

Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings of Case No.44920/2024, arising out of Crime No.41/2023, State V/s Mohd. Salman Quarishi and others, U/s 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 406 I.P.C. & Section 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-Mahila Thana, District-Lucknow, pending before the Court of Civil Judge (J.D.) F.T.C. (Crime against women) Lucknow, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicants.

¶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 :- 6.2.2025

¶16

ML/-

¶17

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

Mohd. Salman Qureshi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secretiate Lko. and 1 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohd. Salman Qureshi and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Civil Secretiate Lko. and 1 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

Suresh Bahadur Yadav and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru Prin Secy Home Civil Sectt and Another

Shivendra Singh Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mayank Singh Alias Rishab and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Ashutosh Verma and Another Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. (Home) Govt. of U.P. Lko. and Another

Liyakat @ Liyakat Ali and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Mo Siraj and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another