Omkar And 3 Others v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 482
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 323, 504, 506
Key paragraphs
- Para 77. 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…
- Para 99. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 39851 of 2023 "State Versus Omkar & others", arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Malihabad, Lucknow…
Judgment
Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ramu Verma, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party No.2 is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State of U.P., learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the record.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 39851 of 2023 "State Versus Omkar & others", arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Malihabad, Lucknow Gramin pending before Special Chief Judicial Magistrate Custom District Lucknow as well as charge-sheet No. 01 of 2022 dated 10.9.2022 submitted by the investigating officer in the aforesaid case crime number and summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Custom.
Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 06.12.2023, a direction was given to the trial court to verify the factum of compromise executed by the parties. In pursuance of the aforesaid order, learned trial court had verified the contents of compromise.
Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no. 2 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the trial court vide report/order dated 22.12.2023.
Learned A.G.A. has fairly conceded that compromise has been effected between the parties and the same has duly been verified by the trial court.
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.
In view of the aforesaid and the fact that parties do not want to pursue the case any further, the matter is purely of personal nature, which has been mutually settled between the parties by way of the compromise, therefore, no useful purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed. The entire proceedings of Criminal Case No. 39851 of 2023 "State Versus Omkar & others", arising out of Case Crime No. 386 of 2022 under Sections 323, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police Station- Malihabad, Lucknow Gramin pending before Special Chief Judicial Magistrate Custom District Lucknow as well as charge-sheet No. 01 of 2022 dated 10.9.2022 submitted by the investigating officer in the aforesaid case crime number and summoning order dated 26.04.2023 passed by the learned Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Custom are hereby quashed.
Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith. Order Date :- 13.1.2025 Arpan
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482; Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 323, 504, 506.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Allahabad High Court, on 13 Jan 2025. The bench was RAJEEV SINGH.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.