Raghav Ram and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:32218

Court No. - 14

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3312 of 2025 Applicant :- Raghav Ram And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Prem Prakash Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rajesh Kumar

¶4

Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

¶5

Supplementary affidavit filed today is taken on record.

¶6

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

¶7

"to quash the proceedings of Criminal Case No. 634 of 2024, State Vs Amit Kumar and Others arising out of Case Crime No. 0212/2023, U/S- sections 308,323,147 IPC. Police-Station -Tanda, District- Ambedkarnagar, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Ambedkarnagar, in the interest of justice.

¶8

It is further prayed that proceedings of Criminal Case No.-634 of 2024, State Vs Amit Kumar and Others arising out of Case Crime No.- 0212/2023, U/S- sections 147, 323, 308 IPC., Police-Station- Tanda, District- Ambedkarnagar, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate Ambedkarnagar, may kindly be stayed during the pendency of this petition."

¶9

Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 22.01.2025 entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 15.05.2025 in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 7.5.2025 passed in present application.

¶10

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

¶11

It appears that after considering the averments made in the present application and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated7.5.2025 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶12

It appears from the order dated 15.05.2025 (Annexure No. S.A.2) that the trial court has verified the compromise.

¶13

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 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.

¶14

Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the the applicant.

¶15

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

¶16

Order Date :- 28.5.2025 S. Kumar

¶17

Digitally signed by :- SANTOSH KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Raghav Ram and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raghav Ram and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Ram Surat Pal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vivek Kumar Singh @ Suraj Singh and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Anand Kumar Gautam and Another vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and Another

Rajendra Prasad vs Sri Amit Singh, P.S.F., Divisional Forest Officer, Social Forestry, Forest Range, Sultanpur

U.P. Shia Central Waqf Board Thru Chairman and Anr. vs Smt. Najma Hasan and Ors.

Nitin Kumar Verma and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another