Ram Sajiwan Alias Babu v. State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home Sectt. Lko And 3
Case at a glance
- Bench
- SHREE PRAKASH SINGH
Outcome
Allowed
down by the Supreme Court of India, the instant application is allowed and
Provisions considered
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 376, 504, 506
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ss. 3, 4
Key paragraphs
- Para 66. 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 instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings, arising…
Judgment
Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the charge- sheet no.10/2022 dated 13.01.2022 and charge order dated 11.04.2022, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act relating to FIR/Case Crime No.0499/2021 lodged at Police Station Fatehpur, District Barabanki and to quash the entire criminal proceedings, arising out of the aforesaid case crime number, pending in the court of learned Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO Act), Court No.46, Barabanki on the ground that the parties have arrived at a compromise/settlement.
Learned counsels for the parties submit that the parties have settled their dispute amicably outside the Court and they have arrived at a compromise. The compromise entered into between the parties has been placed on record as Annexure-7 to the application. The parties have confirmed the terms of the compromise. The compromise has been verified between the parties by learned Senior Registrar of this Court vide order dated 20.08.2024 in compliance of the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by this Court in the present application.
I have considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.
Considering the 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 2 A482 No. 3027 of 2024 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 proceedings in pursuance of the criminal proceedings would be an exercise in futility.
Operative part
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 instant application is allowed and the entire proceedings, arising out of FIR/Case Crime No.0499/2021 lodged at Police Station Fatehpur, District Barabanki, including the charge-sheet no.10/2022 dated 13.01.2022 and charge order dated 11.04.2022, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC read with Section 3/4 POCSO Act, are hereby quashed.
The compromise deed shall be made part of this order.
Consign to record. September 9, 2025 MVS/- (Shree Prakash Singh,J.) MANOJ VIKRAM SINGH CHAUHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: down by the Supreme Court of India, the instant application is allowed and
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Indian Penal Code, 1860 — ss. 376, 504, 506; Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — ss. 3, 4.
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.