Allowed¶8

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jul 2025A482/5628/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Section 482 CrPC quashing on compromise/settlement; SC/ST Act 3(2)(Aa)(Ka)(va) offence without caste-based allegation; IPC 354 molestation; Ramawatar v. State of M.P. (2022) 13 SCC 635 applied; settlement verified by trial court; interest of justice; Allahabad High Court Lucknow Bench; Subhash Vidyarthi J.; 2025:AHC-LKO:39734; Application U/S 482 No. 5628 of 2025.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Charge Sheet No. 600/2021 dated 24/09/2021, summoning order dated 23/12/2021 and the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 151/2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 114/2021, under Sections 354 IPC & 3(2)(Aa)(Ka) or (va) SC/ST Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar. ¶8

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶8

Issue for consideration

Whether the Charge Sheet No. 600/2021, summoning order dated 23/12/2021 and the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 151/2021 (arising out of Case Crime No. 114/2021) under Sections 354 IPC & 3(2)(Aa)(Ka) or (va) SC/ST Act can be quashed on the basis of a settlement/compromise arrived at between the parties.

¶2

Court's answer

The FIR does not level any allegation indicating that the offence was committed because of the caste of the victim, notwithstanding the SC/ST Act provision mentioned in the charge sheet.

¶5

Ratio / Principle

Since the parties have amicably settled their disputes outside the court, are living peacefully and harmoniously, and the informant does not want continuance of any proceedings, continuance of the criminal proceedings against the applicants will not be in the interest of justice.

¶7

Key takeaways

In view of the compromise between the parties and the law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the petition is allowed and the Charge Sheet No. 600/2021 dated 24/09/2021, summoning order dated 23/12/2021 and the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 151/2021 are quashed.ratio¶8

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Quashing — S. 482 Cr.P.C. — compromise between parties — Charge Sheet No. 600/2021 (dt. 24/09/2021), summoning order (dt. 23/12/2021) and entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 151/2021 (Case Crime No. 114/2021) under Ss. 354 IPC & 3(2)(Aa)(Ka)/(va) SC/ST Act, P.S. Ibrahimpur, Dist. Ambedkar Nagar — parties settled dispute by compromise dt. 11.12.2024, verified by trial court; FIR contained no allegation that offence was committed on account of victim's caste — relying on Ramawatar v. State of M.P., (2022) 13 SCC 635, Court held continuance of proceedings would not be in the interest of justice and quashed the charge sheet, summoning order and entire criminal proceeding. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.; Order dt. 11.7.2025)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:39734

¶2

Court No. - 15

¶3

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 5628 of 2025

¶4

Applicant :- Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Amit Kumar,Panna Lal Gupta Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.

¶6

Heard Sri Panna Lal Gupta, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned AGA for the State, Sri Subrat Gupta, learned counsel for opposite parties No. 2 & 3 and perused the records.

¶7

By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has sought quashing of the impugned Charge Sheet No. 600/2021 dated 24/09/2021, summoning order dated 23/12/2021 as well as the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 151/2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 114/2021, under Sections 354 IPC & 3(2)(Aa)(Ka) or (va) SC/ST Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, on the basis of a settlement arrived at between the parties.

¶8

The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged on 29.08.2024 alleging that the applicant had molested the informant's sister on 28.08.2024.

¶9

A settlement arrived at between the parties on 11.12.2024 has been annexed with the application wherein it is stated that the parties have resolved their dispute and cordial relations have been established between them. Both the parties do not want any proceedings to continue. The validity of the compromise has been verified by the trial court.

¶10

Although Section 3/2 SC/ST Act is mentioned in the charge sheet, the FIR does not level any allegation indicating that the offence was committed because of the caste of the victim.

¶11

In the case of Ramawatar v. State of M.P., (2022) 13 SCC 635 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:

¶12

"17. ........where it appears to the Court that the offence in question, although covered under the SC/ST Act, is primarily private or civil in nature, or where the alleged offence has not been committed on account of the caste of the victim, or where the continuation of the legal proceedings would be an abuse of the process of law, the Court can exercise its powers to quash the proceedings. On similar lines, when considering a prayer for quashing on the basis of a compromise/settlement, if the Court is satisfied that the underlying objective of

¶13

the Act would not be contravened or diminished even if the felony in question goes unpunished, the mere fact that the offence is covered under a “special statute” would not refrain this Court or the High Court, from exercising their respective powers under Article 142 of the Constitution or Section 482CrPC."

¶14

Keeping in view the fact that the parties have amicably settled their disputes outside the court and they are living peacefully and harmoniously and the informant does not want continuance of any proceedings against the applicants, I am of the view that the continuance of criminal proceedings against the applicants will not be in the interest of justice.

¶15

In view of the fact that the parties have settled their dispute outside the Court by way of compromise arrived at between the parties and law laid down by the Supreme Court of India, the present petition is allowed and the impugned Charge Sheet No. 600/2021 dated 24/09/2021, summoning order dated 23/12/2021 as well as the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Case No. 151/2021, arising out of Case Crime No. 114/2021, under Sections 354 IPC & 3(2)(Aa)(Ka) or (va) SC/ST Act, Police Station Ibrahimpur, District Ambedkar Nagar, are hereby quashed.

¶16

Order Date :- 11.7.2025 Pradeep/-

¶17

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

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

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

Ravi Gupta and 4 Others Vs State of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Mo. Firoz Khan @ Firoz Khan Vs Prin. Judge Family Court Sultanpur and Another

Dileram Maurya Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 2 Others

Sushant Sharma vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Alok Kumar Singhal vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Tansen @ Lodhai Chauhan vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others