State v. Sanjibul Huk and others

Shri Chandan Tiwari, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, which is taken on record. The present case has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 of B.N.S.S. with the following main relief:- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the the summoning/cognizance dated 27.11.2024 passed by Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, III, Court No.27, Lucknow in Criminal Case No.113140/2024 " State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" in pursuant to the Charge sheet filed under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C. in FIR No.596 of 2022 related at Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow) as well as to quash Charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 allegedly filed against the applicants under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of FIR No.596 of 2022 related to Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), on the basis of compromise verification order dated 26.03.2025, in the interest of justice. (contained as Annexure No. 1 & 2, respectively) It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.113140/2024 "State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" pending in the court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, III, Court No.27, Lucknow arising out of charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of the FIR No.596 of 2022 related to Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), on the basis of compromise verification order dated 26.03.2025 and/or pass such others which this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, so far as it relates to the applicants. Further, it is also prayed that during the pendency of the present petition, further criminal proceedings in the Criminal Case No. 113140/2024 "State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" arising out of Charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 filed under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of FIR No.596 of 2022 related at Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow) may kindly be stayed in respect of the applicants. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the present petition, the Learned Court below may be directed to not to take any coercive measures against the applicants, during pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court." Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 26.03.2025 (annexure no. 5) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 26.03.2025 (annexure no. 5) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 625 of 2025 (annexure no. 4). Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that he has no grudge or grievance against the present applicants now. It appears that after considering the averments made in the aforesaid case preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide the aforesaid order referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It appears from the order dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure No.5) that the trial court has verified the compromise. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlement between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed,as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the the applicant. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Ashish ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Shri Chandan Tiwari, Advocate has filed his vakalatnama on behalf of respondent nos. 2 and 3, which is taken on record. The present case has been filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. /528 of B.N.S.S. with the following main relief:- "For the facts, reasons and circumstances as stated in the accompanying petition, which is duly supported by an affidavit, it is most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to quash the the summoning/cognizance dated 27.11.2024 passed by Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, III, Court No.27, Lucknow in Criminal Case No.113140/2024 " State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" in pursuant to the Charge sheet filed under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C. in FIR No.596 of 2022 related at Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow) as well as to quash Charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 allegedly filed against the applicants under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of FIR No.596 of 2022 related to Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), on the basis of compromise verification order dated 26.03.2025, in the interest of justice. (contained as Annexure No. 1 & 2, respectively) It is further prayed that this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash the entire criminal proceedings of Criminal Case No.113140/2024 "State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" pending in the court of Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, III, Court No.27, Lucknow arising out of charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of the FIR No.596 of 2022 related to Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow), on the basis of compromise verification order dated 26.03.2025 and/or pass such others which this Hon ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, so far as it relates to the applicants. Further, it is also prayed that during the pendency of the present petition, further criminal proceedings in the Criminal Case No. 113140/2024 "State Vs. Sanjibul Huk and others" arising out of Charge sheet dated 07.08.2022 filed under section 147, 323, 354, 354 (Kha), 506, 504 I.P.C., in respect of FIR No.596 of 2022 related at Police Station Chinhat, District - Lucknow East (Commissionerate Lucknow) may kindly be stayed in respect of the applicants. It is further prayed that during the pendency of the present petition, the Learned Court below may be directed to not to take any coercive measures against the applicants, during pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court." Learned counsel for the respective parties have submitted that a compromise dated 26.03.2025 (annexure no. 5) entered into between the parties has been verified by the learned trial court by its order dated 26.03.2025 (annexure no. 5) in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 24.01.2025 passed in Application U/S 482 No. 625 of 2025 (annexure no. 4). Learned Counsel for the respondent no. 2 has submitted that he has no grudge or grievance against the present applicants now. It appears that after considering the averments made in the aforesaid case preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicants, this Court vide the aforesaid order referred the matter to the concerned court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It appears from the order dated 26.03.2025 (Annexure No.5) that the trial court has verified the compromise. Considering the aforesaid as also the submissions made by learned Counsel for the parties as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. L. Muniswamy and Others, 1977 (2) SCC 699; State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335; Prashant Bharti Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2013) 9 SCC 293; Rajiv Thapar and Ors. Vs. Madan Lal Kapoor, (2013) 3 SCC 330; Ahmad Ali Quraishi and Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Ors. (2020) 13 SCC 435, according to which inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. (akin to Section 528 BNSS, 2023) could be exercised to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure ends of justice, as also the observations made by Apex Court in the case of Ramgopal and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2022) 14 SCC 531, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab [2012 10 SCC 303], Mohd. Ibrahim Vs. State of U.P., 2022 SCC Online ALL 106, Gold Quest International Ltd. Vs. State of Tamilnadu, 2014 (15) SCC 235, B.S. Joshi Vs. State of Haryana, 2003 (4) SCC 675, Jitendra Raghuvanshi Vs. Babita Raghuvanshi, 2013(4) SCC 58, Madhavarao Jiwajirao Scindia Vs. Sambhajirao Chandrojirao Angre, 1988 1 SCC 692, Nikhil Merchant Vs. C.B.I. and another, 2008(9) SCC 677, Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others, 2008(16) SCC 1, State of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, 2019(5) SCC 688, Narindra Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and another, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Manoj Kumar and others Vs. State of U.P and others (2008) 8 SCC 781, Union Carbide Corporation and others Vs. Union of India and others (1991) 4 SCC 584, Manohar Lal Sharma Vs. Principal Secretary and others (2014) 2 SCC 532 and Supreme Court Bar Association Vs. Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409, according to which, in given facts, based upon the settlement between the parties the criminal proceedings can be quashed,as also the nature of dispute/crime, this Court is of the view that the present application is liable to be allowed as chances of ultimate conviction are extremely bleak and hence no useful purpose would be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to continue. Accordingly, present application is allowed. Consequently, the entire proceedings, quoted above, are hereby quashed as far as it is related to the the applicant. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 9.4.2025 Ashish ASHISH MISHRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench