Smt. Sabra Khatoon and 3 Others Vs State of U.P… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

Smt. Sabra Khatoon and 3 Others Vs State of U.P… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 66145 of 2023, including the charge-sheet no. 01 dated 08.05.2023 in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 under Sections 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC and the summoning order dated 12.06.2023, quashed as far as related to the applicants; Office/Registry directed to send a copy of the order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance.

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge-sheet no. 01 dated 08.05.2023 in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 (Sections 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC), the summoning order dated 12.06.2023, and the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 66145 of 2023 pending before the Court of ACJM 1st Lucknow ought to be quashed in exercise of the inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the parties having entered into a compromise verified by the trial court.

Court's answer

The trial court has verified the compromise dated 16.01.2025 entered into between the parties (order dated 18.03.2025).

Ratio / Principle

Considering the verified compromise, the submissions of counsel and the settled principles in the cited Apex Court decisions on exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) and on quashing of criminal proceedings upon settlement between the parties, 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 is allowed and the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 66145 of 2023 (charge-sheet no. 01 dated 08.05.2023 in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 under Sections 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC, with summoning order dated 12.06.2023) are quashed as far as they relate to the applicants.ratio¶13

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench (Manish Kumar, J.; Order Date 7.7.2025) — Application U/S 482 No. 3314 of 2025 — Quashing of criminal proceedings on settlement between parties. Applicants (Smt. Sabra Khatoon and 3 others) sought quashing of the charge-sheet no. 01 dated 08.05.2023 in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 under Sections 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC, the summoning order dated 12.06.2023, and the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 66145 of 2023 pending before the Court of ACJM 1st Lucknow. The parties had entered into a compromise dated 16.01.2025, verified by the trial court by order dated 18.03.2025 in pursuance of the High Court's order dated 07.03.2025 passed in Application Under Section 482 No. 2105 of 2025; counsel for respondent no. 2 stated he had no grudge or grievance against the applicants. Relying on Apex Court observations on the exercise of inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) to prevent abuse of process or secure the ends of justice (Muniswamy; Bhajan Lal; Prashant Bharti; Rajiv Thapar; Ahmad Ali Quraishi) and on quashing of proceedings based on settlement (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; Supreme Court Bar Association), the Court held that chances of ultimate conviction were extremely bleak and no useful purpose would be served by continuing the criminal proceedings. Application allowed; entire proceedings quashed as far as related to the applicants; Registry directed to send the order to the court concerned through email/fax for compliance.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:38355

Court No. - 27 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3314 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Sabra Khatoon And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ruved Kamal Kidwai,Najam Zafar,Pooja Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manish Kumar,J.

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

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and Shri Nishant, learned counsel for the respondent no. 2.

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

" To issue an order or directions for quashing the charge-sheet bearing number 01 dated 08.05.2023 submitted in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 under Section 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC pending before the court of ACJM 1st Lucknow and as well as the summoning order dated 12.06.2023 as contained in annexure no. 1 and 2 to this petition.

To issue an order or directions for quashing the entire proceedings of Crl. Case No. 66145 of 2023 bearing chargesheet number 1 dated 08.05.2023 submitted in Crime No. 0035 of 2023 under Section 406/420/506/451/120-B IPC pending before the Court of ACJM 1st lucknow. "

Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 16.01.2025 (annexure no. 4) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 18.03.2025 (annexure no. 6) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 07.03.2025 passed in Application Under Section 482 No. 2105 of 2025.

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

It appears from the order dated 18.03.2025 (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 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.

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 :- 7.7.2025/DiVYa

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