# Raees @ Kallu & Ors v. State Of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2025) 8 ILRA 343
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2025-08-12
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482 No. 46117 of 2023
- **Bench:** Jitendra Kumar Sinha
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/raees-kallu-ors-v-state-of-u-p-anr-53680
- **Pages:** 3

## Headnote

G.A., Krishna Dutt Tiwari

Issue for Consideration
Instant petition has been filed with the prayer to
direct the trial court to commence the
proceedings in Case No.7782 of 2019, arising
out of Case Crime No. 379 of 2004, under
Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323 IPC, read with
Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
Petitioner
further
seeks
a
direction
for
expeditious disposal of the proceedings and the
conclusion of Complaint Case No. 4934 of 2019,
which is pending before the learned Additional
Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ACJM, Moradabad.

Head Notes
The Constitution of India, 1950-Article
227- Petitioner-wife constrained to invoke
supervisory jurisdiction of this Hon'ble
Court under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, seeking appropriate directions to
uphold the rule of law, secure a fair and
impartial adjudication in the pending
proceedings, and protect her from any
form of undue influence, harassment, by
the accused or other interested parties -
Petition allowed with certain directions to
the concerned court.

Held- Petitioner's matrimonial life has been
severely disrupted by protracted litigation and
continuous interference from her in-laws -
Considerable lapse of more than two decades -
It is regrettable that the trial court has failed to
commence or conduct any effective proceedings
in the matter - Prolonged and unexplained
inaction by the trial court constitutes not only a
denial of timely justice but also a serious erosion
of the rule of law and a violation of the
petitioner's fundamental right to a fair and
expeditious trial - Petitioner was not afforded an
opportunity of hearing on any occasion when
this Court granted interim stayed the arrest of
accused(s) or stayed the trial court proceedings
- The conduct of the accused(s), particularly
their repeated non-appearance despite multiple
opportunities, has resulted in an undue delay in
the progress of the trial - While certain delays
may
be
justified
under
exceptional
circumstances, the State cannot absolve itself
from the constitutional responsibility of ensuring
speedy justice to litigants - a mandate
con

## Text

8 All. Raees @ Kallu & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
343

Provided that for reasons to be
recorded in writing, the Special Court may
permit such disclosure, if in its opinion
such disclosure is in the interest of the
child.

Explanation.--For the purposes of
this sub-section, the identity of the child
shall include the identity of the child's
family, school, relatives, neighbourhood or
any other information by which the identity
of the child may be revealed.

(8) In appropriate cases, the
Special Court may, in addition to the
punishment,
direct
payment
of
such
compensation as may be prescribed to the
child for any physical or mental trauma
caused
to
him
or
for
immediate
rehabilitation of such child.

(9) Subject to the provisions of
this Act, a Special Court shall, for the
purpose of the trial of any offence under
this Act, have all the powers of a Court of
Session and shall try such offence as if it
were a Court of Session, and as far as may
be, in accordance with the procedure
specified
in
the
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) for trial
before a Court of Session."

7. By plain reading of Section 33(1) of
POCSO Act, it specifically deals with the
power conferred to the Special Judge,
POCSO Act, to take cognizance of offence
only on two basis, firstly complaint,
secondly on police report. In the instant
matter, once the police report in shape of
final
report
submitted
by
concerned
Investigating Officer has been rejected and
the protest petition preferred at the behest
of informant/victim has been allowed, the
scope available before learned Special
Judge is only to treat the matter as
Complaint Case and the summoning of the
applicant
might
be
ensured
after
consideration of the statements recorded
under sections 200, 202 Cr.P.C and as such
impugned order dated 05.04.2022 is not
sustainable in the eye of law and is hereby
set aside.

8. The instant application u/s 482
Cr.P.C. stands allowed accordingly.

9. However, it is made clear that this
order will not preclude, learned Special
Judge(POCSO Act)/Additional District and
Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad to proceed
against the applicants by way of treating
the matter as Complaint Case and the
summoning of the applicants shall be
dependent upon the free set of judicious
conscious
of
court
concerned
after
recording
statements
under
sections
200/202 Cr.P.C.
---------
(2025) 8 ILRA 343
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.08.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE JITENDRA KUMAR SINHA, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 46117 of 2023

Raees @ Kallu & Ors. ...Applicants
Versus
State Of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicants:
Rizwan Ahmad

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
G.A., Shubham Kesarwani

Issue for consideration
Matters pertains to quashing of criminal
proceedings
on
compromise
between
the
parties.
344 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Headnotes
Indian penal Code-sec. 23, 324, 325, 326,
506- Compromise entered between the parties-
said compromise has been verified by the
learned court concerned- in the interest of
justice -impugned proceedings be quashed.
Application allowed. (E-9)

Case Law Cited
1. State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Laxmi Narayan
and others, AIR 2019 SC 1296

List of Acts
Indian penal Code

List of Keywords
Compromise; verified by the learned court

Appearances of parties
 Counsel for Applicant :- Rizwan Ahmad,
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Shubham
Kesarwani

(Delivered by Hon'ble Jitendra Kumar
Sinha, J.)

1. Heard Sri Rizwan Ahmad, learned
counsel for the applicants, Sri Shubham
Kesarwani, learned counsel for the opposite
party no.2, Sri V. P. Maurya, learned AGA
for the State-opposite party no.1.

2. This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has
been preferred for quashing of the entire
criminal proceeding of the impugned
charge sheet dated 14.04.2012 as well as
impugned
cognizance
order
dated
30.08.2012 in Case No.1079 of 2012 (State
Vs. Raees and others), arising out of Case
Crime No.432 of 2011, under sections 323,
324, 325, 326, 506, IPC, Police Station
Didauli, District Amroha, pending in the
court of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Amroha, on the basis of compromise
arrived at between the applicants and
opposite party no.2 on 27.07.2023.

3. It is contended by learned counsel
for the applicants that the applicants and
opposite party no.2 have entered into
compromise and the said compromise has
been
verified
by
the
learned
court
concerned i.e. Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Amroha and the report to the above effect
is placed on record. Learned counsel for the
applicants prays that in view of the
compromise
arrived
at
between
the
applicants and opposite party no.2, the
proceedings of the aforesaid case be
quashed.

4. Learned AGA for the State as well
as learned counsel for the opposite party
no.2 have no objection to the above
submissions of learned counsel for the
applicants.

5. In view of the fact that matter has
been compromise between the applicants
and
opposite
party
no.2
and
said
compromise has been verified by the
learned court concerned 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.

6. In view of the aforesaid, the entire
criminal proceeding of the impugned
charge sheet dated 14.04.2012 as well as
impugned
cognizance
order
dated
30.08.2012 in Case No.1079 of 2012 (State
Vs. Raees and others), arising out of Case
Crime No.432 of 2011, under sections 323,
324, 325, 326, 506, IPC, Police Station
Didauli, District Amroha, pending in the
court of the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Amroha, are hereby quashed.
8 All. Sudha Agarwal @ Sudha Garg Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
345

7. The application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. is
allowed.
---------
(2025) 8 ILRA 345
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 12.08.2025

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE VINOD DIWAKAR, J.

Matters Under Article 227 No. 3880 of 2025

Sudha Agarwal @ Sudha Garg ...Petitioner
Versus
State Of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Dr. Sudha Garg

Counsel for the Respondents:
G.A., Krishna Dutt Tiwari

Issue for Consideration
Instant petition has been filed with the prayer to
direct the trial court to commence the
proceedings in Case No.7782 of 2019, arising
out of Case Crime No. 379 of 2004, under
Sections 498A, 504, 506, 323 IPC, read with
Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act,
Petitioner
further
seeks
a
direction
for
expeditious disposal of the proceedings and the
conclusion of Complaint Case No. 4934 of 2019,
which is pending before the learned Additional
Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ACJM, Moradabad.

Head Notes
The Constitution of India, 1950-Article
227- Petitioner-wife constrained to invoke
supervisory jurisdiction of this Hon'ble
Court under Article 227 of the Constitution
of India, seeking appropriate directions to
uphold the rule of law, secure a fair and
impartial adjudication in the pending
proceedings, and protect her from any
form of undue influence, harassment, by
the accused or other interested parties -
Petition allowed with certain directions to
the concerned court.

Held- Petitioner's matrimonial life has been
severely disrupted by protracted litigation and
continuous interference from her in-laws -
Considerable lapse of more than two decades -
It is regrettable that the trial court has failed to
commence or conduct any effective proceedings
in the matter - Prolonged and unexplained
inaction by the trial court constitutes not only a
denial of timely justice but also a serious erosion
of the rule of law and a violation of the
petitioner's fundamental right to a fair and
expeditious trial - Petitioner was not afforded an
opportunity of hearing on any occasion when
this Court granted interim stayed the arrest of
accused(s) or stayed the trial court proceedings
- The conduct of the accused(s), particularly
their repeated non-appearance despite multiple
opportunities, has resulted in an undue delay in
the progress of the trial - While certain delays
may
be
justified
under
exceptional
circumstances, the State cannot absolve itself
from the constitutional responsibility of ensuring
speedy justice to litigants - a mandate
consistently reiterated by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court and essential to the very foundation of
the rule of law. ( E-15)

Case Law Cited

List of Acts
The Constitution of India, 1950-Article 227

List of Keywords
Speedy justice to litigants; Persistent hardship
endured by the petitioner; Matrimonial life
severely disrupted by protracted litigation;
Prevent miscarriage of justice

Case Arising From
Case No.7782 of 2019, arising out of Case Crime
No. 379 of 2004, under Sections 498A, 504,
506, 323 IPC, read with Section 3/4 of the
Dowry Prohibition Act, Complaint Case No. 4934
of 2019, which is pending before the learned
Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division)/ACJM,
Moradabad.

Appearances for Parties
Counsel for Petitioner: - Dr. Sudha Garg
Counsel for Respondent: -G.A., Krishna Dutt
Tiwari