Allahabad High Court
Ankit Yadav And 8 Others vs State Of U.P. & 2 Others on 1 September, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:154807
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 13750 of 2024
Ankit Yadav And 8 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. & 2 Others
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Harish Chandra Mishra, Shivam Mishra
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A., Rajendra Prasad Maury
Court No. - 89
HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.
1. The case is taken up on mentioning.
2. Heard Sri Shivam Mishra, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri B.P. Singh, learned AGA for the State-opposite party no.1.
3. The name of Sri Rajendra Prasad Maury, appears in the cause list, as learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3, but he is not present today.
4. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred with prayer to quash the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.293 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Ankit Yadav and others) and Session Trial No.454 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Arjun Yadav), under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 452, 504, 506, 307, IPC, Police Station Babina, District Jhansi, arising out of Case Crime No.112 of 2021, pending before the Special Judge (E.C. Act), Jhansi, on the basis of compromise.
5. It is contended by learned counsel for the applicants that he tried to contact Sri Rajendra Prasad Maury, learned counsel for the opposite party nos.2 & 3, telepathically, however, he did not respond. It is further contended by learned counsel for the applicants and opposite party nos.2 & 3 have entered into compromise and the said compromise has already been verified by the learned court concerned and a report regarding verification of compromise sent by the court concerned is already on the record. He further submits that there is no injury sustained by the injured which could come under the category of section 307 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicants further prays that in view of the compromise entered into between the applicants and opposite party no.2, the proceeding of the aforesaid case be quashed.
6. On the other hand, learned AGA for the State has no objection to the above submissions made by learned counsel for the applicants.
7. In view of the fact that applicants and opposite party nos.2 & 3 have entered into compromise and the said compromise has already been verified by the learned court concerned and a report regarding verification of compromise is already on the record and taking note of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296 and the facts of the matter, it would be in the interest of justice that the impugned proceedings be quashed, in respect of the applicants.
8. In view of the aforesaid, the entire proceeding of Sessions Trial No.293 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Ankit Yadav and others) and Session Trial No.454 of 2022 (State of U.P. Vs. Arjun Yadav), under sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 452, 504, 506, 307, IPC, Police Station Babina, District Jhansi, arising out of Case Crime No.112 of 2021, pending before the Special Judge (E.C. Act), Jhansi, are hereby quashed.
9. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed.
(Jitendra Kumar Sinha,J.) September 1, 2025 VKG