Raja @ Sachin Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Home Lko. and Another

Allahabad HC25 Nov 2025A482/3319/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing on compromise; Case Crime No.0503 of 2019; Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 IPC; P.S. P.G.I., Lucknow; compromise verified by court below vide report dated 5.12.2024; inherent powers to do real and substantial justice; relied on Gian Singh v State of Punjab (2012 AIR SCW 5333), B.S. Joshi v State of Haryana ((2003) 3 SCC 675), Narinder Singh v State of Punjab ((2014) 6 SCC 466); Rajeev Singh, J.; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; decided November 25, 2025; APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3319 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., Lucknow, quashed; Office directed to communicate the order to the court below forthwith. ¶¶18

Raja @ Sachin Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Home Lko. and Another — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶18

Issue for consideration

Whether the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., Lucknow, ought to be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the parties having entered into a verified compromise.

¶¶9

Court's answer

Inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be used to do real and substantial justice and can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties, following Gian Singh, B.S. Joshi and Narinder Singh.

¶¶16

Ratio / Principle

Since the matter is purely of personal nature and has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, and the parties do not want to pursue the case any further, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶¶17

Key takeaways

The application is allowed and the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 under Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., Lucknow, are quashed.ratio¶¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench), Rajeev Singh, J.: Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. by the applicant seeking quashing of the entire proceedings of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 (Sections 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., P.S. P.G.I., Lucknow) allowed. Parties had entered into a compromise, verification of which was directed by order dated 18.11.2024 and duly verified by the court below vide report dated 5.12.2024; learned A.G.A. conceded the compromise. Relying on Gian Singh v. State of Punjab (2012 AIR SCW 5333), B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana ((2003) 3 SCC 675) and Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab ((2014) 6 SCC 466), the Court held that inherent power can be exercised to end criminal proceedings where the parties have settled a dispute of purely personal nature, and quashed the entire proceedings (decided 25.11.2025).

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3319 of 2025

Raja @ Sachin Singh

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Another	Of Home	Lko.	And	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Rishi Saxena Saxena	Saxen , Jaya	a, Gaurav ditya Rai,	Mani, Gaurav Neeraj Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Singh,	Amit Rohit	Kumar Verma	Tiwari, Ayushi

¶7

Court No. - 14

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶9

1. Heard, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 and perused the record. 2. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 under Section 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., Lucknow.

¶10

3. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 18.11.2024 a direction was given to the court below to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, the learned court below verify the contents of compromise and it was duly verified.

¶11

4. Learned counsel for the applicant and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the court below vide report dated 5.12.2024.

¶12

5. Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by

¶13

A482 No. 3319 of 2025

¶14

¶15

the court below.

¶16

6. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 . Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties.

¶17

7. In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.

¶18

8. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.0503 of 2019 under Section 147, 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station P.G.I., Lucknow, is hereby quashed .

¶19

9. Office is directed to communicate this order to the court below, forthwith.

¶20

(Rajeev Singh,J.)

¶21

November 25, 2025

¶22

GauraV/-

¶23

Digitally signed by :- GAURAV PAL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Raja @ Sachin Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Home Lko. and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Raja @ Sachin Singh v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. of Home 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

Irfan Raza Khan and 3 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Mini. Welfare and Waqf and 3 Others

Smt Savitri Tripathi, Thru. Her Son Sharad Kumar Tripathi vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. and 4 Others

Govind and 2 Others vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Dhirendra Pratap Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Ankur Singh and Another vs State of U.P Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Jitendra Kumar Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Transport Lko. and 3 Others