[Cites 7, Cited by 0]
Allahabad High Court
Sahanvaj @ Sahanvaj Khan vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of ... on 2 April, 2026
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC-LKO:23182
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
LUCKNOW
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 2732 of 2026
Sahanvaj @ Sahanvaj Khan
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko. And Another
.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)
:
Ankit Dubey, Amar Nath Dubey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)
:
G.A., Anil Kumar Yadav
Court No. - 16
HON'BLE SHREE PRAKASH SINGH, J.
Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav,Advocate, has put in appearance by way of filing Vakaltanama on behalf of opposite party no. 2 and the same is taken on record.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Mr. Anil Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for opposite party no. 2,learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
The instant application under Section 482 Cr.P.C./528 of the B.N.S.S. has been filed with the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceeding of Criminal Misc. Case No. 4431/2023, arising out of charge sheet dated 29-11-2022 relating to Case Crime No. 70/2022, U/S-307, 504,506 of I.P.C, Police Station-Leelapur, District-Pratapgarh, State of U.P. Vs Sahvanvaj as well as impugned summoning order dated 21.02.2023 passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 13, Pratapgarh pending before him on the basis of compromise dated 26.3.2026.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that due to misunderstanding, the present applicant has been named in the F.I.R., though he is not involved in committing such offence. He next submits that thereafter the parties entered into a compromise and the compromise deed has been reduced in writing on 26-03-2026 and they have settled their dispute. Now there is no grievance or dispute in between the parties and they have put their dispute at rest. He has made emphasis that it is case of no injury and only allegation of attempt to commit murder has been levelled.
Adding his arguments, he submits that as per the ratio of law laid down in paragraph no. 15.4 in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Laxmi Narayan and Others, reported in (2019) 5 Supreme Court Cases, 688, the Hon'ble Apex Court has formulated the guidelines so far as the compromise under sections 307 readwith section 34 I.P.C. is concerned. Para no. 15.4 of the Judgment in the case of Laxmi Narayan(Supra) is extracted hereinunder:-
"15.4. Offences under Section 307 IPC and the Arms Act, etc. would fall in the category of heinous and serious offences and therefore are to be treated as crime against the society and not against the individual alone, and therefore, the criminal proceedings for the offence under Section 307 IPC and/or the Arms Act, etc. which have a serious impact on the society cannot be quashed in exercise of powers under Section 482 of the Code, on the ground that the parties have resolved their entire dispute amongst themselves. However, the High Court would not rest its decision merely because there is a mention of Section 307 IPC in the FIR or the charge is framed under this provision. It would be open to the High Court to examine as to whether incorporation of Section 307 IPC is there for the sake of it or the prosecution has collected sufficient evidence, which if proved, would lead to framing the charge under Section 307 IPC. For this purpose, it would be open to the High Court to go by the nature of injury sustained, whether such injury is inflicted on the vital/delicate parts of the body, nature of weapons used, etc. However, such an exercise by the High Court would be permissible only after the evidence is collected after investigation and the charge-sheet is filed/charge is framed and/or during the trial. Such exercise is not permissible when the matter is still under investigation. Therefore, the ultimate conclusion in paras 29.6 and 29.7 of the decision of this Court in Narinder Singh [Narinder Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 6 SCC 466 : (2014) 3 SCC (Cri) 54] should be read harmoniously and to be read as a whole and in the circumstances stated hereinabove;"
Referring the aforesaid ratio, he submits that in the instant matter, the nature of injuries are as such wherein this court can invoke jurisdiction while exercising its powers under section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the criminal proceedings. He next added that criminal proceedings initiated in the instant matter would be a futile exercise and therefore, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Case Crime No. 70 of 2022, may be quashed.
On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the opposite party nos. 2 submits that the parties have entered into a compromise on 26-03-2026 and he has annexed the certified copy of the compromise deed dated 26-03-2026 as Annexure No. 5 with this application. He added that there is no dispute in between the parties and thus, the criminal proceedings initiated against the applicants may be dropped.
Learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has no objection to the contentions aforesaid.
Now whether the parties have, in fact, compromised the matter or not, can best be ascertained by the trial court as such compromise has to be duly verified in presence of the parties concerned before the Court.
Accordingly, this application is disposed of with a direction to the court concerned that if any such compromise is filed before it, it shall issue notices to all the signatories to the compromise requiring their personal presence and, thereafter, proceed to verify the compromise. If the aforesaid compromise is verified, a report to that effect shall be prepared by the court and the compromise will be made part of the record.
The court in that scenario will allow the parties to obtain certified copy of the report as well as compromise and it will be open to the applicants to approach this Court again for quashing of the proceedings.
For a period of three months, the proceedings initiated in pursuance of Criminal Misc. Case No. 4431/2023, arising out of charge sheet dated 29-11-2022 relating to Case Crime No. 70/2022, U/S-307, 504,506 of I.P.C, Police Station-Leelapur, District-Pratapgarh, shall remain stayed so far as present applicants is concerned.
Office is directed to return the original compromise deed to the learned counsel for the applicants, if any, after taking the photocopy of the same.
(Shree Prakash Singh,J.)
April 2, 2026
AKS
