SMT. SARLA AND ANOTHER v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME DEPTT. LKO. AND ANOTHER
A482/3361/2025 · 2025-04-24
Alok Mathur
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133371 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 133371 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:23602
Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3361 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Sarla And Another Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Mithila Bakhsh Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.
1. Heard Sri M. B. Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned Additional Government Advocate for the State of U. P. and Sri Ram Pratap Tiwari, learned counsel who has put in appearance for opposite party No.2 and filed vakalatnama, which is taken on record.
2. By means of present application u/s 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have prayed for quashing the entire proceedings of criminial miscellaneous case No.4635 of 2021 under Section 406 I.P.C., police station P.G.I. District Lucknow pending in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Lucknow on the basis of compromise deed 17.10.2024 (as contained in Annexure - 1 to the affidavit filed in support of application).
3. Facts in brief are that opposite party No.2 filed a complaint case before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow stating that on demand of money made by applicant No.2 on the occasion of marriage of his daughter the complainant had given Rs.4 lakhs through account payee cheque No.193146 dated 3.1.2016 in the name of the wife of applicant No.2 to be repaid within six months but the same has not been returned. The said complaint was registered as complaint case No.4635 of 2021 and the applicants have been summoned vide order dated 26.7.2024 to face the trial under Section 406 IPC.
4. It has been contended by learned counsel for the applicants that this Court by means of order dated 25.10.2024 passed in application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. No.9808 of 2024,
directed the parties to appear before the trial court for verification of the compromise. In compliance of aforesaid
order, the parties appeared before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-IV, Room No.28, Lucknow on the date fixed who has verified the compromise and a report dated 18.11.2024 to this effect has been submitted for perusal of this Court. Therefore, the proceedings of aforesaid criminal case may be
quashed in view of the compromise dated 17.10.2024.
5. Learned counsel for the applicants in support of his contention has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State, (2008) 16 SCC 1, Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand, (2014) 9 SCC 653 and has submitted that the applicants as well as opposite party no. 2 have compromised the dispute and as such opposite party no. 2 does not want to press the present case against the applicants.
6. Learned counsel appearing for opposite party no. 2 and learned Additional Government Advocate have stated that they have no objection in case the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed in the light of the compromise.
7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
8. From the perusal of the record it is apparent that the parties have entered into compromise and have settled their dispute amicably.
9. In this regard, the view taken by the Apex Court in the case of Manoj Sharma Vs. State (supra), Narinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab (supra) and Yogendra Yadav Vs. State of Jharkhand (supra), which have been relied upon by the
learned counsel for the applicants finds force that this Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can quash the proceedings as the dispute has been amicably settled between the parties.
10. In the light of the fact that the settlement has arrived at between the applicants and the private respondents and does not effect the public at large, and would only amount to private dispute between the parties, no useful purpose will be served will be served by allowing the applicants to be prosecuted in the said trial, therefore the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed, accordingly this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed. (Alok Mathur, J.)
Order Date :- 24.4.2025 RKM. Digitally signed by :- RAKESH KUMAR MAURYA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench