Asif Beg And 3 Others vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others
2023 Latest Caselaw 630 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?Court No. - 66
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 33805 of 2022
 

 
Applicant :- Asif Beg And 3 Others
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Nitika Sharma
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.

Heard Mr. Ashutosh Pandey, Advocate holding brief of Mr. Kapil Kumar, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A for State and Mr. Kuldeep Singh Chahal, the learned counsel representing opposite party nos. 2 and 3.

At the very outset the learned counsel for applicants submits that he may be permitted to delete the name of Mr. Ram Saraswat opposite party 2 as he is neither a necessary nor a proper party in this application.

Prayer made by learned counsel for the applicants is not opposed by learned A.G.A as well as the learned counsel representing opposite party 3.Accordingly it is allowed.

Let necessary amendment be carried out by the learned counsel for applicants during course of the day.

This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed challenging the entire criminal proceeding of criminal case no. 6901233 of 2018 (State Vs. Rashid Beg and Others) under sections 147, 149, 323, 325, 506, 308 I.P.C. and section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Shahganj, District Agra.

At the very outset learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case cannot be terminated on the basis of the compromise entered into by the parties. The injured Ram Saraswat has sustained grievous injury on his head. To buttress his submission he has referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in State of Madhya PradeshVs. Laxmi Narayan and Others (2019) 5 SCC 688.

When confronted with above, learned counsel for the applicants could not overcome the same.

Having heard the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned A.G.A. for the State, Mr. Kuldeep Singh Chahal the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party no. 3 and upon perusal of record the court finds that the criminality alleged against accused-applicants is in respect of a crime not against a person but against the State.

The injury suffered by the injured is grievous in nature and therefore, by virtue of law laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment noted above, the proceedings of aforementioned criminal case cannot be terminated on the basis of compromise entered into by the parties. Accordingly the application fails and is liable to be dismissed.

It is accordingly dismissed.

Order Date :- 6.1.2023

Vikram