Ashok Yadav Vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 7969 of 2025

Ashok Yadav

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Bhola Singh Patel, Verma	Pravin Kumar
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

¶7

Court No. - 11

¶8

HON'BLE SAURABH LAVANIA, J.

¶9

Sri Beant Singh, learned Advocate has filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party no.2, which is taken on record.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record.

¶11

The present application has been filed for the following main relief:-

¶12

"Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 35658/2024 (State vs. Ashok Yadav) arising out of case crime no. 69/2023, under section 420, 427, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Police Station- Indira Nagar, District-Lucknow, is pending before the court of Additional Chief Judicail Magistrate, Seven Lucknow, as well as impugned charge sheet dated 27-032024 which filed against the applicant and the impugned order dated summoning/cognizance 03-04-2024 passed by the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Second, Lucknow contained as Annexure No. 3 and 4 in the interest of justice."

¶13

It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 5076 of 2025 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court

¶14

A482 No. 7969 of 2025

¶15

2

¶16

vide order dated 16.06.2025 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties.

¶17

It appears from the order dated 19.07.2025 (Annexure No.2) that the trial court has verified the compromise, mentioning therein that the parties were present and they have admitted that they have entered into an agreement voluntarily and their signatures have been verified by their respective counsels before the court.

¶18

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 settlements between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed, as also the nature of

¶19

A482 No. 7969 of 2025

¶20

3

¶21

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 arising out of Criminal Case No. 35658/2024, quoted above, are hereby quashed qua the applicant.

¶22

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

¶23

(Saurabh Lavania,J.)

¶24

September 18, 2025

¶25

Jyoti/-

¶26

Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ashok Yadav 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?

Ashok Yadav 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

Juvenile X Thru. His Natural Guardian Mother Y Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Sanjay Singh Vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

X Juvenile Thru. Y, His Brother Vs State of U.P Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 3 Others

Bhagwan Deen and 2 Others vs the State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Vertika Singh @ Vartika Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Bapu Bhawan Lko. and Another

Ashok Yadav vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another