Allahabad High Court
Dinesh vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, ... on 31 July, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:44555
Court No. - 15
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4319 of 2023
Applicant :- Dinesh
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home, U.P. Lko. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Girish Kumar Pandey,Umesh Dixit
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Neeraj Kumar Mishra
Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J.
1. Heard Sri Girish Kumar Pandey, the learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Mohd. Asif Khan, the learned A.G.A. for the State and Sri Neeraj Kumar Mishra, the learned counsel for opposite party No.2 and perused the record.
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.587 of 2021 arising out of the Case Crime No.399/2021 u/S 376, 452, 506 IPC relating to Police Station- Mishrikh, Sitapur pending in the Court of ACJM-I, Sitapur.
3. The aforesaid case was instituted on the basis of an FIR lodged on 21.10.2021 in furtherance of an application filed under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. alleging that the applicant had raped her inside her house.
4. The victim was not examined medically and, therefore, the allegations are not supporteed by the findings of the medico-legal examination report. During pendency of the proceedings, the parties have arrived at a settlement dated 07.02.2023 wherein it is recorded that the parties are related to each other and the FIR was lodged because of some disputes between them. It is stated in the compromise that the FIRs regarding commission of offence under Section 376 IPC were lodged from persons of the sides against each other. Now, the parties have arrived at a settlement and they do not want any proceedings to continue.
5. Opposite party No.2 has filed a counter affidavit admitting the aforesaid averment and supporting the prayer for quashing of the proceedings.
6. 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."
7. 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.
8. Although the FIR alleges commission of rape, the victim had not undergone medico-legal examination and, therefore, the allegations are not supported by the findings of the medico-legal examination report; it is stated in the compromise that the parties are related to each othe, FIRs alleging commission of rape were lodged from both the sides against persons of the other side and all the disputes have been amicably resolved, I am of the view that the proceedings of the present case deserves to be quashed.
9. Accordingly, the present application is allowed and the entire proceedings of Criminal Case No.587 of 2021 arising out of the Case Crime No.399/2021 u/S 376, 452, 506 IPC relating to Police Station- Mishrikh, Sitapur pending in the Court of ACJM-I, Sitapur are quashed.
.
(Subhash Vidyarthi,J.)
Order Date :- 31.7.2025
-Amit K-
