Hari Shanker vs The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 15 October, 2025

[Cites 8, Cited by 0]

Allahabad High Court

Hari Shanker vs The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home ... on 15 October, 2025

Bench: Rajeev Singh





HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:64370
 

 
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
LUCKNOW 
 
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8606 of 2025   
 
   Hari Shanker    
 
  .....Applicant(s)   
 
 Versus  
 
   The State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. And 3 Others    
 
  .....Opposite Party(s)       
 
   
 
  
 
Counsel for Applicant(s)   
 
:   
 
Himanshu Shekhar   
 
  
 
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)   
 
:   
 
G.A.   
 
     
 
 Court No. - 14
 
   
 
 HON'BLE RAJEEV SINGH, J.

1. Vakalatnama filed by Shri Ram Prakash Shukla, Advocate on behalf of the opposite party No. 4 is taken on record.

2. Heard 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.

3. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet dated 29.08.2015 in Criminal Case No. 6014/2016 (2206014/16), State v. Hari Shanker and two others, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M. Second, Sitapur, arising out of Case Crime No. 108A/2015 under Sections 147,323,504,506 I.P.C., P.S. Atariya, District Sitapur, and entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case.

4. Learned counsel for the applicants as well as learned counsel for opposite party No.4 jointly submitted that vide order dated 19.06.2025 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.

5. Learned counsel for the applicants and learned counsel for opposite party no. 4 jointly submitted that the parties have entered into compromise, which has duly been verified by the trial court vide report/order dated 11.07.2025.

6. Learned 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.

7. Hon'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.

8. In 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.

9. For the discussions made above, the present application is allowed and charge-sheet dated 29.08.2015 in Criminal Case No. 6014/2016 (2206014/16), State v. Hari Shanker and two others, pending in the Court of A.C.J.M. Second, Sitapur, arising out of Case Crime No. 108A/2015 under Sections 147,323,504,506 I.P.C., P.S. Atariya, District Sitapur, and entire proceedings of aforesaid criminal case, are hereby quashed.

10. Office is directed to communicate this order to learned trial Court, forthwith.

(Rajeev Singh,J.) October 15, 2025 A.Nigam

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Allahabad High Court