Irsaad Khan @ Irsaad and 3 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. of Home Lko. U.P. and 5 Others

Court No. - 12 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 11589 of 2024 Applicant :- Irsaad Khan @ Irsaad And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. U.P. And 5 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Mukesh Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Lavania,J. Sri Gulam Mustafa, Advocate, has put in appearance for the private opposite party Nos. 2 to 6 and has filed his Vakalatnama, which is taken on record. Heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The present application has been filed by the applicants for the following main relief:- "Wherefore it is most respectfully prayed before this Hon'ble court may kindly be pleased to quash the impugned charge sheet No. 87/2020 dated on 11.06.2020 in S.T. No. 1088/2022 arising out case crime no. 99/2020 U/S-308, 323, 325, 504 I.P.C. P.S. Asivan District Unnao, Filed by the I.O. against the applicants and as well as summoning order dated 19.03.2021 pending in the court of district and session judge Unnao as contained in Annexure no. 2 & 3 to this application." It appears that after considering the averments made in the Application U/S 482 Cr.P.C. No. 7044 of 2024 and the documents in support thereof as also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant, this Court vide order dated 12.08.2024 referred the matter to the concerned court/trial court for the purpose of verification of the compromise entered into between the parties. It further appears from the order of the trial court dated 07.09.2024 annexed at Page No. 85 of this application that the trial court has verified the compromise entered into between the parties. Based upon the aforesaid facts as also the observations made by the Hon'ble Apex Court in various pronouncements, learned counsel for the applicants stated that the instant application be allowed and pending proceedings in issue be quashed. Based upon the compromise entered into between the parties, learned counsel for the opposite parties also stated that the opposite parties do not want to continue with the proceeding in issue and the same may be quashed. Considering the aforesaid and also the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and the nature of dispute/crime and also the observations made by the Hon'ble 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, 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 arising out of Case Crime No. 99/2020, indicated above, are hereby quashed. Office/Registry is directed to send the copy of this order to the court concerned through email/fax for necessary compliance. Order Date :- 18.12.2024 Arun/- High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench