POOJA SINGH v. STATE OF U.P. THRU. ITS PRIN. SECY. HOME LKO. AND ANOTHER
A482/6184/2025 · 2025-07-30
Subhash Vidyarthi
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 154764 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 154764 (ALL) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44252 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6184 of 2025 Applicant :- Pooja Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Rohit Verma Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Rohit Verma, the learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Maneesh Kumar Pandey, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Umesh Chandra, 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 applicant has sought quashing of the entire proceedings of NCR No. 61 of 2016 under Section 323 IPC, P.S.-Gomti Nagar, District-Lucknow and also summoning order dated 07.06.2017.
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-4 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 proceedings of NCR No. 61 of 2016 are hereby quashed. Order Date :- 30.7.2025 Vinay/- Digitally signed by :- VINAY KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench