Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 73668 (ALL)

NARENDRA SINGH @ NARINDRA @ FERI v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/24634/2025 · 2025-09-16

Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24634 of 2025 Court No. - 92 HON'BLE RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent and perused the material available on record. 2. Instant application under Section 528 BNSS, has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing of charge sheet dated 06.10.2023 and cognizance/summoning order dated 01.01.2024 as well as entire proceeding of Case No. 2796 of 2024 arising out of Case Crime No. 271 of 2023, under Section 174A I.P.C., Police Station- Sarsawa, District- Saharanpur pending before the learned Additional Civil Judge, (J.D.)/IVth/J.M., Court No. 33, Saharanpur. 3. Leaned counsel for the applicant submit that the applicant was accused in Case Crime No. 56 of 2022 under Sections 498, 323, 377, 504, 506 I.P.C. and 3/4 of D.P. Act. Instant FIR was lodged on 10.09.2023 at the instance of father-in-law of the applicant for non-appearance in the proceeding of Case Crime No. 56 of 2022. He further submits that the said offence is punishable for maximum term of three years. He next submits that in original matrimonial case, counseling was carried out, wherein parties were agreed to live separately and on that basis, a compromise took place between the parties and investigation was concluded on the basis of compromise and final report in favour of the applicant-accused was submitted which was accepted by the court concerned vide order dated 02.07.2024, however, as case was already registered against the applicant under Section 174A I.P.C. on 10.09.2023, a chargesheet was filed against him for this offence regarding his non-appearance in response to proceeding under Section 82Cr.P.C. on 06.10.2023 on which cognizance has been taken by learned trial court by impugned order dated 01.01.2024. It is further argued that as the dispute has already been resolved between the parties by compromise and main case has Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sumit Goyal Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Narendra Singh @ Narindra @ Feri .....Applicant(s) State of U.P. and Another .....Opposite Party(s) been closed on the basis of final report submitted by the Investigating Officer in the case, no useful purpose of law would be served by keeping the said case pending and proceeding of such criminal case under Section 174A of I.P.C., may kindly be closed on account of closure of main case on the basis of compromise and on final report, inasmuch as, no objection was raised by the informant on said final report. 4. Learned A.G.A., although, did not dispute the factual contentions made by learned counsel for the applicant, but said that the offence under Section 174A I.P.C. was made out as soon as the applicant failed to comply the command of the court concerned issued in proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C., therefore, it cannot be said that no offence is made out against the applicant. 5. Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of decisions has held that inherent power can be used to do real and substantial justice as has been held in Gian Singh Vs State of Punjab, 2012 AIR SCW 5333, B.S. Joshi and others Vs State of Haryana, (2003) 3 SCC 675 and Narinder Singh Vs State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466. Hence, inherent power can be exercised to speed up the process of ending the criminal proceedings where the settlement is arrived at between the parties. 6. Considering the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, nature of offence, totality of facts and circumstances of the case and also technical nature of the offence and the fact that the criminal case during investigation of which the present case was registered against the applicant under Section 174A of I.P.C. has itself been decided on the basis of final report no useful purpose of law would be served to keep the proceeding pending any further and in the larger of interest of justice, the proceeding of present case are liable to be quashed. 7. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and consequently, the entire proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case are hereby quashed. September 17, 2025 Anjali NA528 No. 24634 of 2025 2 (Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra,J.) Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- ANJALI SHARMA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad