Salman and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Salman and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Entire proceedings of Case no. 93857/2019 (Crime no. 1213/2018, Sections 452/504/506/427 IPC, P.S. Gazipur, District Lucknow, styled 'State Vs Salman and others'), the summoning order dated 13.12.2019 and the charge sheet dated 21.1.2019 quashed as far as related to the applicants; Registry directed to send the order to the court concerned through email/fax for compliance.

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings of Case no. 93857/2019 (Crime no. 1213/2018, Sections 452/504/506/427 IPC, P.S. Gazipur, District Lucknow, styled 'State Vs Salman and others'), together with the summoning order dated 13.12.2019 and the charge sheet dated 21.1.2019, should be quashed in favour of the applicants in view of the compromise entered into between the parties and verified by the trial court.

Ratio / Principle

Considering the compromise between the parties verified by the trial court, the submissions of counsel, and the relied-upon observations of the Apex Court, this Court held that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

Key takeaways

The application was accordingly allowed and the entire proceedings of Case no. 93857/2019 (Crime no. 1213/2018), including the summoning order dated 13.12.2019 and charge sheet dated 21.1.2019, were quashed as far as they related to the applicants; the Office/Registry was directed to send the order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 14) | Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:19188 | Manish Kumar, J. | Order dated 05.04.2025 | APPLICATION U/S 482 No. 2910 of 2025. Salman and five others applied under Section 482 Cr.P.C./Section 528 BNSS to quash the entire proceedings of Case no. 93857/2019 (Crime no. 1213/2018) under Sections 452/504/506/427 IPC, Police Station Gazipur, District Lucknow, styled 'State Vs Salman and others', together with the impugned summoning order dated 13.12.2019 and charge sheet dated 21.1.2019. The parties had entered into a compromise dated 04.12.2024, which the learned trial court verified by order dated 15.02.2025 pursuant to this Court's order dated 27.01.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 589 of 2025; respondent no. 2 stated he had no grudge or grievance against the applicants. Relying on Supreme Court authority on quashing criminal proceedings upon settlement (L. Muniswamy; Bhajan Lal; Prashant Bharti; Rajiv Thapar; Ahmad Ali Quraishi; Ramgopal; Gian Singh; Mohd. Ibrahim; Gold Quest; B.S. Joshi; Jitendra Raghuvanshi; Madhavarao Scindia; Nikhil Merchant; Manoj Sharma; Laxmi Narayan; Narindra Singh; Manoj Kumar; Union Carbide; Manohar Lal Sharma; SCBA), and noting that inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) may be exercised to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice, the Court found chances of ultimate conviction extremely bleak and no useful purpose in continuation, allowed the application and quashed the entire proceedings as far as related to the applicants, directing the Registry to send the order to the court concerned for compliance.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:19188

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2910 of 2025

Applicant :- Salman And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Brijendra Kumar Tiwari,Brijendra Pratap Singh,Jitendra Bahadur Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Shri Shailendra Yadav, 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 to quash the entire proceeding of Case no. 93857/2019 Crime no. 1213/2018 U/s 452/504/506/427 I.P.C Police Station Gazipur, District Lucknow, styled as State Vs Salman and others as well as impugned summoning order dated 13.12.2019 and charge sheet dated 21.1.2019.

Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 04.12.2024 (Annexure No. 4) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 15.02.2025 (Annexure No. 6) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 27.01.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 589 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. 589 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 27.01.2025, 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 15.02.2025, 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 applicants.

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

Order Date :- 5.4.2025 DiVYa

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