Allowed

Ram Roop v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC7 Mar 2025A482/2100/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Application to quash criminal proceedings under Sections 323/325/504 IPC after the parties settled their dispute by compromise verified by the trial court. Relying on Supreme Court precedents permitting quashing on compromise, the High Court allowed the application and quashed the proceedings.

What did the court decide?

Criminal proceedings of Session Trial No.280/2024 (Case Crime No.327/2020, Sections 323/325/504 IPC) quashed.

Ram Roop Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and… — Quashing and FIR | Allahabad HC (2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:13927

¶2

Court No. - 30

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2100 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Ram Roop Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vivek Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Om Prakash Shukla,J.

¶6

Power filed today by Shri P.K. Mishra, Advocate on behalf of opposite party No.2 is taken on record.

¶7

Heard Shri Vivek Pandey, learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and Shri P.K. Mishra, learned counsel for opposite party No.2.

¶8

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (Now Section 528 of B.N.S.S., 2023) has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings of the Session Trial No.280/2024, Criminal Case No.247/2021 arising out of Case Crime No.327/2020 under Section 323/325/504 I.P.C., Police StationJaitpur, District-Ambedkar Nagar pending before Special Judge SC/ST Act, District-Ambedkar Nagar.

¶9

Learned counsel for the parties submit that the applicant and opposite party No.2 have amicably settled their dispute outside the court vide compromise dated 11.12.2024, copy of which is on record as Annexure-6 to the application.

¶10

Further it has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that in compliance of order passed by this Court dated 29.01.2025 the compromise has been verified by the learned trial court.

¶11

Learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State concede the argument made by learned counsel for the applicant.

¶12

Learned counsel for the parties submits that in view of the judgments of Hon'ble Apex Court in B. S. Joshi and others versus

¶13

State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus State of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466 , the proceedings pending before learned trial court are liable to be quashed.

¶14

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise and from perusal of the record it appears that the compromise has been verified by trial court and the verification report dated 12.02.2025 is on record as well as law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases (supra), the present application is allowed and the criminal proceedings (supra) are hereby quashed.

¶15

(Om Prakash Shukla, J.)

¶16

Order Date :- 7.3.2025 -Piyush-

¶17

Digitally signed by :- PIYUSH YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ram Roop v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Roop 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

Golu @ Martand Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru.Its Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home and 3 Others

Ghanshyam Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Ghanshyam Verma vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Nadeem Ahmad @ Fatch Bahadur and 5 Others Vs the State of U.P. Thru. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home, Lko. and Another

Virendra Singh Yadav and 6 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Chandra Mani Yadav and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another