Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 113765 (ALL)

VIJAY PRATAP SINGH AND OTHERS v. State of U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME and another

A482/4/2025 · 2025-01-06

Saurabh Lavania

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:556 Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4 of 2025 Applicant :- Vijay Pratap Singh And Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ramendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned Counsel for opposite party no.2 learned AGA for the State of U.P. and gone through the record. The present application has been filed for the following main relief:- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances stated in the accompanying Petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, it is expedient in the interest of justice that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to quash the entire proceeding Case No. 3000/2014, F.I.R. No. 21/2014, U/S- 498-A, 323,504,506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.- Mahila Thana, District- Sitapur, 'State Versus Vijay Pratap Singh and others' Pending before Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) F.T.C. / C A W. District Sitapur contained in Annexure No.4, on the basis of compromise, to the accompanying affidavit, in the interest of Justice. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the present Petition under section 482 C.R.P.C. /528 BNSS, this Hon'ble may kindly be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the Case No. 3000/2014, F.I.R. No. 21 /2014, U/S- 498-A, 323,504,506 I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, P.S.-Mahila Thana, District- Sitapur, 'State Versus Vijay Pratap Singh and others' Pending before Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division) F.T.C. / C A W. District Sitapur contained in Annexure No.4, on the basis ofcompromise, in the interest of justice." It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 3967 of 2024 of 2024 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide order dated13.05.2024 referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It appears from the order dated 22.11.2024 (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. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties and the nature of dispute/crime 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, 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 of Case No. 3000/2014 (Supra), indicated in the prayer, quoted above, are hereby quashed. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 6.1.2025 Jyoti/- Digitally signed by :- JYOTI RAJWANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench