Ram Ji and 5 Others v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and 2 Others

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 10516 of 2025 Court No. - 14 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

¶1Vakalatnama filed by Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party Nos.2 and 3 is 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 under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge sheet dated 15.4.2020. and entire proceedings of case no.838 of 2022, (State vs. Ramji & ors) and summoning order dated 28.7.2020 and non - bailable warrant dated 15.11.2025, arising out of crime no.10 of 2020, under sections 308, 147, 342, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Jahangirabad, District-Barabanki passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 27 Barabanki on the basis of compromise deed dated 110.10.2022 annexed as annexure nos. 1 to 3 to this petition.

¶4Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party Nos.2 and 3 jointly submitted that vide order dated 21.10.2022, 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 nos.2 and 3 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the trial court vide report/order dated

11.10.2022.

¶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. Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Indrajeet Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Ram Ji And 5 Others .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others .....Opposite Party(s)

¶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 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 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. The entire proceedings of case no.838 of 2022, (State vs. Ramji & ors), charge sheet dated 15.4.2020, summoning order dated 28.7.2020 and non -bailable warrant dated 15.11.2025, arising out of crime no.10 of 2020, under sections 308, 147, 342, 323, 504, 506 IPC, P.S. Jahangirabad, District-Barabanki passed by Judicial Magistrate, Court no. 27 Barabanki on the basis of compromise deed dated 11.10.2022 (annexure nos. 1 to 3) to this petition are hereby quashed.

¶10Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith. December 16, 2025 Pks A482 No. 10516 of 2025 (Rajeev Singh,J.) High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench