Chandrika Prasad Nishad v. State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home And 2 Others
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
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 applicant, Sri Rakesh Kumar, Advocate who has put in appearance and filed his Vakalatnama on behalf of opposite party nos. 2 and 3, as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State and perused the record. The vakalatnama is taken on record.
The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of the entire proceedings arising out of Case Crime No.1186/2010, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Bikapur, District Faizabad/Ayodhya, pending before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Faizabad/Ayodhya, to quash the charge-sheet no.198/2010 dated 18.10.2010 filed in the aforesaid case crime number and to quash the cognizance order dated 08.11.2010 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate- II, Faizabad/Ayodhya 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-6 to the application. The parties have confirmed the terms of the compromise. The compromise has been verified between the parties by the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Ayodhya vide order dated 02.05.2024 in compliance of the order dated 29.03.2024 passed by this Court in an Application U/s 482 No.2970/2024.
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. 2 A482 No. 7358 of 2025 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 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 Case Crime No.1186/2010, under Sections 376, 504 and 506 IPC lodged at Police Station Kotwali Bikapur, District Faizabad/Ayodhya, pending before the learned Juvenile Justice Board, Faizabad/Ayodhya, including the charge-sheet no.198/2010 dated 18.10.2010 and the cognizance order dated 08.11.2010, are hereby quashed.
The compromise deed shall be made part of this order.
Consign to record. September 2, 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.
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.