Abhishek Kumar and 2 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10528 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶1Vakalatnama filed by Shri Rajesh Kumar Srivastava and Shri Praveen Singh, Advocates on behalf of the opposite party No.2 as well as supplementary affidavit filed by applicants, both are taken on record.

¶2Heard 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.

¶3This application has been filed for quashing the summoning order dated

17.3.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 26 arising out of case crime no.585 of 2015 as well as entire proceedings in (State vs. Abhishek Kumar and others) on the basis of compromise agreement dated

21.11.2025.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.2 jointly submitted that vide order dated 15.09.2025 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.

¶5Learned 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 21.11.2025.

¶6Learned 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.

¶7Hon'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 Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Syed Tamjeed Ahmad Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Abhishek Kumar And 2 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another .....Opposite Party(s) 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.

¶8In 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.

¶9For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and summoning order dated 17.3.2017 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 26 arising out of case crime no.585 of 2015 as well as entire proceedings in (State vs. Abhishek Kumar and others) on the basis of compromise agreement dated 21.11.2025 are hereby quashed.

¶10Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith. December 16, 2025 Pks A482 No. 10528 of 2025 (Rajeev Singh,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench