Rakhi Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Rakhi Kumari Vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Present application allowed; entire criminal proceedings arising out of the summon order dated 16.07.2019 / Chargesheet no. 01/2017 (Case Crime No. 0822/2017, Sections 323, 504, 506, 388 IPC, P.S. Madiyaon, Lucknow) quashed as far as related to the applicant; Office/Registry directed to send the copy of the order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the summon order dated 16.07.2019 (State vs Rakhi Kumari & Ors.), pending before the Judicial Magistrate-III, Lucknow, arising out of Chargesheet no. 01/2017 and Case Crime No. 0822/2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 388 IPC, should be set aside/quashed in view of the compromise entered into between the parties.

Court's answer

The trial court verified the compromise dated 01.02.2025 entered into between the parties by its order dated 10.03.2025.

Ratio / Principle

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.

Key takeaways

In exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023), based upon the settlement between the parties, the present application is allowed and consequently the entire criminal proceedings are quashed as far as related to the applicant.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Manish Kumar, J.; Order Date 25.3.2025) allowed the Application U/S 482 No. 2589 of 2025 filed by Rakhi Kumari under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 BNSS and quashed, as far as it related to the applicant, the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the summon order dated 16.07.2019 (State vs Rakhi Kumari & Ors.) passed by ACJM, Court No.-28, Lucknow, pending before the Judicial Magistrate-III, Lucknow, arising out of Chargesheet no. 01/2017 dated 08.10.2017 under Sections 323, 504, 506, 388 IPC (Case Crime No. 0822/2017 dated 04.08.2017, P.S. Madiyaon, District Lucknow). A compromise dated 01.02.2025 between the parties had been verified by the trial court by order dated 10.03.2025 pursuant to the High Court's order dated 12.02.2025 in Application U/S 482 No. 1311 of 2025, and respondent no. 2 submitted that he had no grudge or grievance against the applicants. Considering the observations of the Apex Court in State of Karnataka v. L. Muniswamy, State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, Prashant Bharti v. State (NCT of Delhi), Rajiv Thapar v. Madan Lal Kapoor, Ahmad Ali Quraishi v. State of U.P. (inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. exercisable to prevent abuse of process or secure ends of justice) and Ramgopal v. State of M.P., Gian Singh v. State of Punjab, Mohd. Ibrahim v. State of U.P., Gold Quest International v. State of Tamil Nadu, B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, Jitendra Raghuvanshi, Madhavarao Scindia, Nikhil Merchant, Manoj Sharma, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, Narindra Singh, Manoj Kumar, Union Carbide, Manohar Lal Sharma and Supreme Court Bar Assn. (proceedings capable of being quashed on settlement between the parties in given facts), and the nature of dispute/crime, the Court held that chances of ultimate conviction were extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the proceedings.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:17115

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2589 of 2025

Applicant :- Rakhi Kumari Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ravindra Nath Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Shri Ram Singh, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent no.2, which is taken on record.

The present case has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 of B.N.S.S. with a prayer to set-aside/ quash the entire criminal proceedings arising out of the summon order dated 16.07.2019 State vs Rakhi Kumari & Ors passed by ACJM, Court No.-28 Lucknow pending before the Court of Judicial Magistrate-III, Lucknow, Police StationMadiyaon, Distt. Lucknow, U.P. arising out of Chargesheet no. 01/2017 Dated 08.10.2017 U/s 323,504,506,388 IPC arising out of Case Crime No. 0822/2017 Dated 04.08.2017 U/s 323,504,506,388 IPC P.S. Madiyaon, District-Lucknow.

Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 01.02.2025, entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 10.03.2025, in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 12.02.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 1311 of 2025 (Annexure no. 5).

Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that he has no grudge or grievance against the present applicants now.

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 1311 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 12.02.2025, referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It appears from the order dated 10.03.2025 (Annexure No. 6) that the trial court has verified the compromise.

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 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, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the the applicant.

Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

Order Date :- 25.3.2025 DiVYa

Digitally signed by :- DIVYA SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench