Shakeel @ Yusuf Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Shakeel @ Yusuf Vs State of U.P. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the entire proceeding of S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC, the impugned charge sheet dated 12.05.2021 and the summoning order dated 06.09.2021, limited to applicant Shakeel @ Yusuf; parties permitted to file copy of the order before the court concerned within two weeks.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet no. 203 of 2021 dated 12.05.2021, the summoning order dated 06.09.2021 and the entire proceeding of S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC may be quashed in light of the compromise between the parties.

Court's answer

The parties have amicably settled their dispute, the fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties, and quashing the proceedings in light of the compromise would cause no harm or error and would be in the interest of justice.

Ratio / Principle

The entire proceeding of S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC in Case Crime no. 230 of 2021, PS- Kotwali City, District Bijnor, along with the impugned charge sheet dated 12.05.2021 and summoning order dated 06.09.2021, are quashed, only in respect of the applicant Shakeel @ Yusuf.

Key takeaways

The present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed.ratio¶15

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Saurabh Srivastava, J.) allowed Application U/S 482 No. 17079 of 2024 filed by Shakeel @ Yusuf and quashed, only in respect of the applicant, the entire proceeding of S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC in Case Crime no. 230 of 2021, PS- Kotwali City, District Bijnor, together with charge sheet no. 203 of 2021 dated 12.05.2021 and the summoning order dated 06.09.2021, because the parties had amicably settled their dispute and the compromise had been verified by Additional District Judge/F.T.C. II, Bijnor vide order dated 06.06.2024. Reliance was placed on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 (para 58) and Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, (1988) 1 SCC 692. Parties were directed to file the copy of the order before the court concerned within two weeks.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:72974

Court No. - 74

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 17079 of 2024

Applicant :- Shakeel @ Yusuf Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rajiv Sisodia Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J.

Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned AGA for the State.

Present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C has been preferred with a prayer to quash the charge sheet no. 203 of 2021 dated 12.05.2021 as well as summoning order dated 06.09.2021 in S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC in Case Crime no. 230 of 2021, PS- Kotwali City, District Bijnor pending in court of learned Additional District Judge/F.T.C. Court no. 2, Bijnor.

Learned counsel for applicants submitted that the parties had entered into compromise and the same has also been verified by Additional District Judge/F.T.C. II, Bijnor vide order dated 06.06.2024 which is also available as flag 'A' appended to order sheet.

Learned AGA showed no objection to aforesaid contention of learned counsel for applicants.

From perusal of records, it transpires that the parties have amicably settled their dispute and fact of compromise has been confirmed and admitted by learned counsel for the parties and it has been submitted that there would be no harm and error and it would be in the interest of justice that the proceedings may be quashed in light of the compromise.

6.A three-Judge Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Gian Singh v. State of Punjab & another, (2012) 10 SCC 303 , has observed in para 58 of the said judgment that where the High Court quashes a criminal proceeding having regard to the fact that the dispute between the offender and the victim has been settled although the offences are not compoundable, it does so as in its

opinion, continuation of criminal proceedings will be an exercise in futility and justice in the case demands that the dispute between the parties is put to an end and peace is resorted; securing the ends of justice being the ultimate guiding factor.

In the case of Madhavrao Jiwajirao Scindia v. Sambhajirao Chandraojirao Angre, [(1988) 1 SCC 692] , Hon'ble the Apex Court has also observed that where matters are also of civil nature i.e. matrimonial, family disputes, etc. the Court may consider "special facts", "special feature" and quash the criminal proceeding to encourage genuine settlement of disputes between the parties.

In view of the aforementioned facts and circumstances, the entire proceeding of S.T. no. 371 of 2023 (State vs. Shakeel @ Yusuf) under Section 9B, 13 of Explosive Act and sections 336, 304 IPC in Case Crime no. 230 of 2021, PS- Kotwali City, District Bijnor as well as impugned charge sheet dated 12.05.2021 along with summoning order dated 06.09.2021, are hereby quashed, only in respect of applicant herein namely Shakeel @ Yusuf.

Accordingly, the present application under Section 482 of the Code stands allowed .

The parties may file the copy of this order before the court concerned within two weeks from today.

Order Date :- 6.5.2025 Shaswat

Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad