Allowed¶11

Javed Ahmad @ Javed and 3 others v. State of U.P. thru its principal sec. deptt. of home and another and

Allahabad HC12 Feb 2025A482/1133/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing on compromise; Case Crime No. 86/2017, P.S. Dewa, District Barabanki; ST No. 110 of 2017; offences under IPC Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 308, 324, 325, 304, 147, 148; Compromise Verification Report dated 27.01.2025; prior order dated 03.01.2025 in 482 application No. 11901 of 2024; Gian Singh; Ramgopal; Bhajan Lal; L. Muniswamy; inherent power; ends of justice; abuse of process; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Saurabh Lavania, J.; order date 12.2.2025.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 (ST No. 110 of 2017) quashed qua the applicants on the basis of the verified compromise. ¶11

Javed Ahmad @ Javed and 3 others Vs State of U.P. thru its principal sec. deptt. of home and another and — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. allowed; entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 (ST No. 110 of 2017) quashed qua the applicants on the basis of the verified compromise.

¶11

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of ST No. 110 of 2017, arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 (P.S. Dewa, District Barabanki), are liable to be quashed on the basis of the compromise between the parties, in exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

¶7

Court's answer

Inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) can be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice.

¶10

Ratio / Principle

In the given facts of this case, based upon the settlement/compromise between the parties, the criminal proceedings can be quashed.

¶11

Key takeaways

Chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue; hence the application is liable to be allowed.ratio¶11
The entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 are quashed qua the applicants.ratio¶11
Office/Registry is directed to send a copy of the order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Criminal Procedure - Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) - quashing of criminal proceedings on compromise between parties. Applicants sought quashing of the entire proceedings of ST No. 110 of 2017 (State Government Vs Kurban & Ors), CNR No. UPBB010023332017, arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 452, 308, 324, 325, 304, 147 & 148 IPC, P.S. Dewa, District Barabanki, pending before the Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Barabanki, on the basis of the Compromise Verification Report dated 27.01.2025 prepared pursuant to this Court's order dated 03.01.2025 in earlier Application U/S 482 No. 11901 of 2024 directing verification of the compromise. The trial court verified the compromise, recording presence of the parties, their admission of a voluntary agreement, and verification of signatures by their counsels. Relying on the observations of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswammy, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Ramgopal v. State of M.P. and other decisions on exercise of inherent power and quashing on settlement, and considering that chances of ultimate conviction were extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings, the Court allowed the application and quashed the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 qua the applicants. Registry directed to send a copy of the order to the court concerned through email/fax.

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:9133

¶2

Court No. - 12

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1133 of 2025 Applicant :- Javed Ahmad @ Javed And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru Its Principal Sec. Deptt. Of Home And Another And Counsel for Applicant :- Sajjad Husain Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Mohd. Saud Khan

¶4

Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.

¶6

The present application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶7

"Wherefore it is humbly prayed May this Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of ST No. 110 of 2017( State Government Vs Kurban & Ors) registered as CNR No. UPBB010023332017 arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 U/s 323,504,506,452,308,324,325,304,147 & 148 IPC Police Station Dewa District-Barabanki, pending before Addl. District and Sessions Judge Barabanki on the basis of Compromise Verification Report dated 27.01.2025 prepared by learned Trial Court, on the respective direction of the Hon'ble High Court passed in APPLICATION U/S 482 No. -11901 of 2024 (Javed Ahmad @Javed And 3 Others Vs State Of U.P. Through Its Principal Secretary And 3 Others) in the interest of justice. certified copy of the verification report along with the certified copy of the compromise deed are collectively annexed as Annexure No. 2 to this application."

¶8

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 11901 of 2025 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated 03.01.2025 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 27.01.2025 (Annexure No.2) 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.

¶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 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 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

¶11

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. Accordingly, present application is allowed . Consequently, the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No. 86/2017 , quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicants.

¶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 :- 12.2.2025 Jyoti/-

¶14

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

Javed Ahmad @ Javed and 3 others v. State of U.P. thru its principal sec. deptt. of home and another and

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Javed Ahmad @ Javed and 3 others v. State of U.P. thru its principal sec. deptt. of home and another and

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

Ajeet Kumar Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home. Deptt. Lko. and Another

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

Vinay Chandra Tiwari @ Vinay Chandra Vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 3 Others

Priya Tripathi Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Civil Sectt. Lko. and 4 Others

Mohd. Nouman Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Smt. MITHlESH Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another