Allahabad High Court
Anoop Verma Alias Nanha Verma vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. ... on 30 July, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44362
Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6087 of 2025
Applicant :- Anoop Verma Alias Nanha Verma
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And 2 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Krishna Kumar Tiwari
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Krishna Kumar Tiwari, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Verma, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Vivek Chandra, the learned counsel for opposite party Nos.2 & 3 and perused the records.
2. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicants have sought quashing of the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.357/2022 arising out of the Case Crime No.347/2019 under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and 6 of POCSO Act & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act relating to Police Station- Kothi, District- Barabanki pending in the court of Addl. District & Session Judge/ Spl. Judge, Court No.46, Barabanki on the ground that the parties have arrived at a settlement.
3. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged by the opposite party No.2 on 11.11.2019 stating that the applicant had enticed away the informant's minor daughter (the opposite party No.3).
4. After investigation, the Investigating Officer has submitted a charge-sheet dated 27.11.2021 against the applicant. During pendency of the proceedings, the opposite party No.3 has married the applicant on 26.05.2022. It has been stated in the application that the opposite party No.3 is living happily with the applicant as his wife and two children have been born out of their wedlock. The opposite party No.3 has filed a short-counter affidavit on her behalf as well as on behalf of her father (the complainant and the opposite party NO.2) accepting the aforesaid facts and supporting the prayer for quashing of the proceedings.
5. In the case of Bahori Lal v. State of U.P. Thru. Secy. and Another 2024 SCC OnLine All 4596, this Court has examined the scope and ambit of Section 482 Cr.P.C as enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Daxaben v. The State of Gujarat 2022 SCC OnLine SC 936, P. Ramachandra Rao v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 4 SCC 578, Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466, Parbatbhai Aahir v. State of Gujarat, (2017) 9 SCC 641, P. Dharamaraj v. Shanmugam, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1186, State of M.P. v. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, Ramgopal v. State of M.P., (2022) 14 SCC 531, Ramawatar v. State of M.P., (2022) 13 SCC 635 and Kapil Gupta v. State (NCT of Delhi), 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1030 and has culled out the following principles from the aforesaid judgments:
"27. ....... the inherent powers of the High Courts recognized by Section 482 Cr. P.C. are wide and can take care of almost all the situations where interference by the High Court becomes necessary for any other reason amounting to oppression or harassment in any trial, inquiry or proceedings, but the power has to be exercised judiciously and consciously. The High Courts can exercise their jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC for quashing of first information report and investigation, and terminating criminal proceedings if the case of abuse of process of law is clearly made out. Such powers ought to be exercised carefully in the context of quashing criminal proceedings, bearing in mind the nature and effect of the offence on the conscience of the society; the seriousness of the injury,if any, the voluntary nature of compromise between the accused and the victim, the conduct of the accused persons and the other relevant considerations. Though the Courts should be slow in quashing the proceedings wherein heinous and serious offences are involved, the High Court is not foreclosed from examining as to whether there is sufficient evidence which may lead to proving the charges. The High Court can quash the proceedings even in cases where the parties have entered into a settlement after conviction for a heinous offence carrying a maximum punishment for life. The touchstone for exercising the extraordinary power under Section 482 Cr. P.C. would be to secure the ends of justice. There can be no hard and fast rule restricting the powers of the High Court to do substantial justice, as a restrictive construction of inherent powers under Section 482 Cr. P.C. may lead to grave injustice."
6. In the case of K. Dhandapani v. State, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1056, an FIR under Sections 5(j)(ii) read with Section 6, 5(I) read with Section 6 and 5(n) read with Section 6 of Protection of Child from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012 was registered alleging that the appellant who is the maternal uncle of the prosecutrix, had physical relations with the prosecutrix on the promise of marrying her, which amounted to committing rape. He was convicted and sentenced by the Sessions Judge to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years. The High Court had upheld the conviction and sentence. In appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it was submitted that the allegation against the appellant was that he had physical relations with the prosecutrix on the promise of marrying her, whereas he had in fact married the prosecutrix and they had two children and they were being taken care of by the appellant and she was leading a happy married life. The prosecutrix was aged 14 years on the date of the offence and gave birth to the first child when she was 15 years and second child was born when she was 17 years. After taking into consideration these facts, the Hon'ble High Court set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant in view of the subsequent events by observing that "This Court cannot shut its eyes to the ground reality and disturb the happy family life of the appellant and the prosecutrix." However, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had also expressed that the order shall not be treated as a precedent.
7. In the present case, the victim has married the applicant and is residing with her happily, both of them have two children and the victim is supporting the prayer for quashing of the proceedings, the continuance of criminal proceedings against the applicants will not serve the ends of justice. Accordingly, the present application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.357/2022 arising out of the Case Crime No.347/2019 under Sections 363/366/376 IPC and 6 of POCSO Act & 3(2)(v) of SC/ST Act relating to Police Station- Kothi, District- Barabanki pending in the court of Addl. District & Session Judge/ Spl. Judge, Court No.46, Barabanki are quashed.
.
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 30.7.2025
-Amit K-
