SHAKIL AHMAD @ THAKUR v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
A482/6067/2025 · 2025-07-30
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153812 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 153812 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44271 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6067 of 2025 Applicant :- Shakil Ahmad @ Thakur Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Dilip Kumar Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Dilip Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Hans Raj Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Ramesh Pratap Singh, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and perused the record.
2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the summoning
order dated 21.10.2011 passed by the CJM, Gonda in Criminal Case No.1507 of 2010 arising out of the Case Crime No.839/2010 u/S 419/420/467/468/471 IPC relating to Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, Gonda as well as the entire proceedings of the aforesaid case on the basis of compromise entered into between the parties.
3. Learned counsels for the parties submit that they have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at the compromise. Compromise entered into between the parties have been placed on record as Annexure-5 to the petition. The parties have confirmed the terms of the compromise.
4. Opposite party No.2 does not have any objection, if the impugned proceedings are quashed against the applicants.
5. I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.
6. Considering the fact that the dispute between the parties is personal in nature and ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of B. S. Joshi and others versus State of Haryana and another :(2003) 4 SCC 675, Nikhil Merchant versus C.B.I. and another : (2008) 9 SCC 677, Manoj Sharma versus State and others : (2008) 16 SCC 1, Gian Singh versus Station
of Punjab: (2010) 15 SCC 118 and Narinder Singh and others versus State of Punjab and another: (2014) 6 SCC 466, it would be appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to quash the criminal proceedings as continuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.
7. 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 application is allowed and the summoning order dated 21.10.2011 passed by the CJM, Gonda as well as the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.1507 of 2010 arising out of the Case Crime No.839/2010 u/S 419/420/467/468/471 IPC relating to Police Station- Kotwali Nagar, Gonda are quashed . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 30.7.2025 -Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench