Ravindra Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Ravindra Rawat vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. allowed; the entire proceedings — Chargesheet No.01 dated 17.01.2023 in Case Crime No.0556 of 2022, the corresponding cognizance and summoning order dated 17.01.2023, and proceedings of the case in pursuance thereof, pending before Civil Judicial Magistrate Gonda — quashed as far as they relate to the applicant.

Issue for consideration

Whether the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. +1 more

Ratio / Principle

Taking into account the submissions of the parties, the observations of the Apex Court relied upon (including that in given facts, based upon a settlement between the parties, proceedings can be quashed), and the nature of the dispute/crime, this Court held that the present application is liable to be allowed because the chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue.

Key takeaways

The present application was accordingly allowed, and consequently the entire proceedings prayed against (Chargesheet No.01 dated 17.01.2023, the cognizance and summoning order dated 17.01.2023 in Case Crime No.0556 of 2022, and proceedings in pursuance thereof, before Civil Judicial Magistrate Gonda) stand quashed as far as they relate to the applicant.ratio¶7

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Neutral Citation 2025:AHC-LKO:31317 — High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Court No. 14), Hon'ble Manish Kumar, J.; order dated 26.05.2025. Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 B.N.S.S. (No. 3287 of 2025) by Ravindra Rawat ALLOWED: the entire proceedings in Case Crime No.0556 of 2022, P.S.-Colonelganj, District Gonda ('State Vs Ravindra Rawat') — Chargesheet No.01 dated 17.01.2023 under Ss. 341, 504, 506, 468, 471, 419, 420 I.P.C. and 66D & 67 IT Act, and the cognizance and summoning order dated 17.01.2023, before Civil Judicial Magistrate Gonda — quashed as far as they relate to the applicant. Grounds: compromise dated 26.03.2025 between the parties, verified by the trial court on 12.05.2025 pursuant to this Court's referral order of 05.05.2025; respondent no. 2 having no remaining grievance; reliance on Apex Court observations that inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) may be exercised to prevent abuse of process/secure ends of justice and that settlement-based proceedings may be quashed; and the Court's view that chances of ultimate conviction were extremely bleak, making continuance purposeless.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:31317

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3287 of 2025

Applicant :- Ravindra Rawat Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Durgesh Kumar Pathak Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Sumukhi Mehrotra

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A for the State and learned counsel for respondent no. 2.

The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed with the following main prayer:-

" WHEREFORE, it is most humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the Chargesheet No.01 dated 17.01.2023 in Case Crime No.0556 of 2022 U/s 341, 504, 506, 468, 471, 419, 420 I.P.C. and 66D & 67 IT Act, P.S.-Colonelganj, District- Gonda, State Vs Ravindra Rawat pending before Civil Judicial Magistrate Gonda and its corresponding cognizance and summoning order dated 17.01.2023. and proceedings of the case in pursuance thereof, in the ends of justice."

Learned counsels for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure No. 4) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 12.05.2025 (Annexure No. S.A-2) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure No. S.A-1).

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

It appears that after considering the averments made in the application and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide order dated 05.05.2025 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 12.05.2025 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 settlement entered into between the parties as mentioned above, 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 :- 26.5.2025 DiVYa

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