# Vihari & Ors v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2024) 9 ILRA 1169
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2024-09-18
- **Case number:** Application U/S 482 No. 16162 of 2024
- **Bench:** Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/vihari-ors-v-state-of-u-p-anr-52527
- **Pages:** 8

## Headnote

under the act-on the basis of compromise-the
opposite party no.2 has given St.ment before
the Court that he does not want to proceed with
the case-proceedings quashed.

Application allowed. (E-9)

List of Cases cited:
1170 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES

## Text

9 All. Vihari & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1169
deemed necessary, to achieve the objectives
discussed above.

28. On the next date of hearing, the
D.G. of Training HQRS shall file the
current training curriculum and schedule
for police officers above the rank of
constable, focusing on basic training and
the
fundamentals
of
investigation,
including: (i) registration of FIRs; (ii)
arresting
an
accused;
(iii)
seizing
incriminating
material
(including
in
offenses against the human body and
property, as well as cybercrime); (iv) basic
knowledge of the medico-legal aspects of
investigation; (v) discovering facts that lead
to the guilt of the accused; (vi) recording
statements under Sections 180 and 183 of
the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita,
2023, including their relevance as evidence
and related procedures; (vii) the importance
of scientific evidence, such as fingerprints,
forensic reports, weapon seizure, ballistic
reports, blood samples, DNA, CDR, and
CCTV footage; (viii) retrieving evidence
from
pen
drives
and
hard
disks,
downloading evidence from social media,
and the procurement and seizure of such
evidence, as well as compliance with
Section 63 of the Bhartiya Sakshya
Adhiniyam, 2023; (ix) knowledge of
collecting
blood
samples;
and
(x)
precautions to be taken by Investigating
Officer while preparing the charge-sheet
[checklist, if any; or list of does & dont],
(xi) role and accountability of the S.S.P. in
supervising
investigations.
The
list
provided is illustrative and not exhaustive.
The purpose of outlining these steps is to
give the officer an understanding of the
Court's intentions regarding the overall
objective of this order.

29. A copy of this order be also
communicated to the A.C.S (Home), Uttar
Pradesh, and Shri P.K. Giri, the learned
Additional
Advocate
General
for
coordination and compliance. The Chief
Secretary of Uttar Pradesh shall also be
briefed by the ACS (Home) for future
reference, if the need arises.

30. Put up as fresh on 30.09.2024
at 03:45 p.m. as a tied up case before this
Bench and the D.G. Training HQRS shall
appear before the Court virtually through
video conferencing.

31. Interim order, granted earlier,
shall continue till the next date of listing.
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 1169
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 18.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MRS. MANJU RANI
CHAUHAN, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 16162 of 2024

Vihari & Ors. ...Applicants
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Applicants:
Sri Ashutosh Upadhyay

Counsel for the Respondents:
G.A., Sri Ram Surat Patel, Sri Rajesh Kumar
Singh

The application filed to quash the charge sheet
as well as the entire proceeding of the case
under the act-on the basis of compromise-the
opposite party no.2 has given St.ment before
the Court that he does not want to proceed with
the case-proceedings quashed.

Application allowed. (E-9)

List of Cases cited:
1170 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
1. Gian Singh Vs St. of Punj. reported in (2012)
10 SCC 303
2. B.S. Joshi & ors.Vs St. of Har. & anr.; (2003)
4 SCC 675

3. Nikhil Merchant Vs C.B.I.; (2008) 9 SCC 677

4. Manoj Sharma Vs St. & ors.; (2008) 16 SCC 1

5. Gian Singh Vs St. of Punj.; (2012); 10 SCC
303

6. Narindra Singh & ors. Vs St. of Punj.; ( 2014)
6 SCC 466

7. Shaifullah & ors. Vs St. of U.P. & anr.; 2013
(83) ACC 278

8. Pramod & anr. Vs St. of U.P. & anr.
(Application U/S 482 No.12174 of 2020

9. Daxaben Vs St. of Guj., reported in 2022 SCC
Online SC 936

(Delivered by Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani
Chauhan, J.)

1. Learned counsel for the State has
filed an affidavit of compliance today on
behalf of Krishan Kumar, posted as S.P.
Sambhal, which is taken on record.

2. Learned counsel for the opposite
party no.2 has filed an affidavit today,
which is taken on record.

3. Heard Mr. Ashutosh Upadhyay,
learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Ram
Surat Patel, learned counsel for opposite
party no.2 as well as Mr. A.K. Sand,
learned Government Advocate assisted by
Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for
the State and perused the material on
record.

4. This application under Section
482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with the prayer
to quash the charge sheet dated 22.05.2022
as well as entire proceeding of S.T. No.130
of 2022 (State vs. Vihari & Others), arising
out of Case Crime No.101/2022, under
Sections 504, 506, 323 I.P.C. and Sections
3(1)da, 3(1)dha S.C./S.T. Act, Police
Station- Kaila Devi, District- Sambhal as
well as stay the further proceeding of the
aforesaid case, pending before the learned
Additional
District
&
Session
Judge/Special
Judge
(S.C./S.T.
Act),
Sambhal at Chandausi, on the basis of
compromise.

5. On 05.07.2024, the following
order was passed :-

"1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh
Upadhyay, learned counsel for the
applicants, Mr. Ram Surat Pal,
Advocate holding brief of Mr.
Rajesh
Kumar
Singh,
learned
counsel for opposite party no.2 as
well as Mr. D.P. Singh, learned
A.G.A. appearing for the State and
perused the record.
2. The application under
Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the
prayer to quash the charge sheet
dated 22.05.2022 as well as entire
proceeding of S.T. No.130 of 2022,
(State Vs. Vihari & others), arising
out of Case Crime No.101 of 2022,
under Sections 504, 506, 323
I.P.C., and Section 3(1)da, 3(1)dha
of SC/ST Act, Police Station- Kaila
Devi, District-Sambhal, pending
before learned Additional District
& Session Judge/Special Judge
(SC/ST Act), Sambhal, on the basis
of compromise.
3. Learned counsel for the
applicants submits that the parties
have reconciled their differences
and a compromise has been entered
9 All. Vihari & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1171
between them out of Court. In this
regard, an affidavit on behalf of
both the parties has been moved
before
the
Court
concerned
mentioning therein that they have
entered into compromise and they
do not want to press the case, copy
of said affidavit has been annexed
as
Annexure
no.7
to
this
application. Therefore, no useful
purpose
would
be
served
in
continuing the proceedings before
the court below and the same is not
only sheer wastage of time of the
Court but also abuse of the process
of law. Hence, proceedings of the
aforesaid case be quashed in the
light of law laid down by the Apex
Court in the case of Gian Singh v.
State of Punjab reported in (2012)
10 SCC 303.
4. Learned counsel for the
opposite party no.2 does not
dispute the correctness of the
submissions made by the learned
counsel for the applicants.
5.
Learned
A.G.A.,
however, submits that it is the
concerned court below, which has
to verify the fact as to whether the
parties
have
entered
into
compromise, hence the parties may
approach the concerned court
below and move an application
with
respect
to
compromise
between the parties, which will be
decided in accordance with law.
6. Whether a compromise
has taken place or not can at best
be ascertained by the court, where
the proceedings are pending, after
ensuring the presence of the parties
before it.
7. In view of the above,
both the parties are directed to
appear before the court below
along with a certified copy of this
order within two weeks from today
and be permitted to file a proper
compromise deed. It is expected
that the trial court may fix a date
for
the
verification
of
the
compromise and after ensuring the
presence
of
parties,
pass
an
appropriate order with respect to
the same in accordance with law,
after hearing the informant, as
expeditiously
as
possible,
preferably within a period of two
months from today. While passing
the order verifying the compromise,
the concerned court shall also
record the statements of the parties
as to whether all the terms and
conditions
mentioned
in
the
original compromise deed, so filed,
have been fulfilled or not? The
facts regarding the amount towards
compensation as received and
stated to be returned, shall also be
verified.
8. If the said compromise
as well as compensation is verified,
the same shall be made part of the
record and report to that effect, will
be prepared and the parties would
be allowed to obtain certified copy
thereof and file the same before this
Court.
9. Put up this case on
06.08.2024, as fresh, at 02:00 p.m.
10. Till then, no coercive
measure shall be taken against the
applicants in the aforesaid case."

6. As the opposite party no.2 was
not ready to return the money as informed
by the learned counsel for the applicants,
therefore, on 22.08.2024, the following
order was passed :-
1172 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
"1. Earlier on the basis of
compromise deed annexed at page
61 (Annexure No. 7) to the
application, the counsel for the
parties (Mr. Ashutosh Upadhyay
for the applicant and Mr. Ram
Surat Patel, Advocate holding brief
of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Singh for the
opposite party no. 2, wrongly typed
as Ram Surat Pal in the earlier
order
dated
05.07.2024),
had
requested the Court to send the
matter for verification of the
aforesaid compromise.
2. Today, when the matter
was taken up counsel for the
applicant has fairly conceded that
he
wants
to
withdraw
the
application as the opposite party
no. 2 is not ready to return the
compensation
amount
of
Rs.
75,000/-
as
paid
by
State
Government,
therefore,
the
opposite party no. 2 Ajay Pal has
reframed from the compromise as
entered between the parties. This
conduct of opposite party no. 2 is
not appreciated.
3. Let the opposite party
no. 2 be present here alongwith
draft of Rs. 75,000/- as once he has
entered
into
compromise
and
placed
his
signatures
on
the
compromise
deed,
he
cannot
withdraw his consent from the
compromise on this ground.
4. The S.P., Sambhal is
directed to ensure presence of
opposite party no. 2 on the next
date of listing.
5.
The
aforesaid
information shall also be given by
Mr. Ram Surat Patel, Advocate
holding brief of Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Singh, learned counsel for the
opposite party no. 2 to opposite
party no. 2.
6. Put up this case as fresh
on 4th September, 2024.
7. Till then, no coercive
action shall be taken against the
applicants in the present case.
8. Registrar (Compliance)
is directed to communicate this
order to the S.P., Sambhal for its
compliance forthwith.
9. Mr. Amit Singh Chauhan,
learned AGA-I shall inform about
this order to Mr. A.K. Sand, learned
Government Advocate, who shall
also
look
into
necessary
compliance of this order."

7. In non-compliance of the
aforesaid
order,
on
04.09.2024,
the
following order was passed :-

"1. Heard Mr. Ashutosh
Upadhyay, learned counsel for the
applicants, Mr. Rajesh Kumar
Singh, learned counsel for opposite
party no.2 as well as Mr. Amit
Singh Chauhan, learned AGA for
the State.
2. As per the order dated
22.08.2024, the S.P. Sambhal was
directed to ensure the presence of
opposite party no.2 before this
Court on 4th September, 2024 i.e.
today. Though, letter from the office
of learned Government Advocate
has been sent but the order has not
been complied with.
3. Learned counsel for
opposite party no.2 submits that the
opposite party no.2 has informed
him that he has not received any
compensation amount.
4.
Let
the
District
Magistrate, Sambhal place a report
9 All. Vihari & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1173
regarding the fact as to whether
compensation amount has been
given to the opposite party no.2 or
not by the next date. In compliance
of
the
earlier
order
dated
22.08.2024, the S.P. Sambhal shall
also be present before this Court.

5. Put up this case, as
fresh, on 18th September, 2024.
6. Interim order granted
earlier is extended till the next date
of listing.
7. Registrar (Compliance)
shall look into the compliance of
this order by calling for the
compensation
report
from
the
District Magistrate, Sambhal and
also ensure the presence of S.P.
Sambhal on the next date fixed.
8. The learned Government
Advocate shall also look into
compliance of this order.
9. Let a copy of this order
be given to the learned Government
Advocate free of cost."

8. In compliance of the aforesaid
order, today Mr. Ashutosh Upadhyay,
learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Ram
Surat Patel, learned counsel for opposite
party no.2 as well as Mr. A.K. Sand,
learned Government Advocate assisted by
Mr. Mayank Awasthi, learned counsel for
the State are present.

9. In compliance of the earlier
order, S.P. Sambhal namely Krishan Kumar
is present before this Court. The opposite
party no.2 namely Ajay Pal has been
brought to this Court by Rajeev Malik,
SHO, Police Station- Kaila Devi, District-
Sambhal and has been identified by Mr.
Ram Surat Patel, learned counsel appearing
on his behalf.
10. When specific query was
raised by this Court to opposite party no.2
namely Ajay Pal as to why he was not
returning the compensation amount, he
could not give a proper answer and
tendered apology admitting that, under
pressure of the villagers he has lodged a
false FIR. He states that he will be careful
in the future. The opposite party no.2 also
states that he does not want to press the
case and has stated that he has given such a
statement before the trial court and a
certified copy of the aforesaid statement as
given by the opposite party no.2 before the
court below is passed on to the Court today
and the same has been placed on record.

11. Opposite party no.2 has
brought a demand daft of Rs.75,000/- in
favour of District Social Welfare Officer,
Sambhal dated 17.09.2022 issued by State
Bank of India having Demand Draft
No.071515. The aforesaid draft is being
sent to Registrar General, High Court of
Judicature at Allahabad to be returned to
the concerned District Magistrate after
retaining a photocopy of the same. The
District Magistrate, Sambhal shall place the
said draft before the District Social Welfare
Officer, Sambhal who in turn shall deposit
the aforesaid draft in the State Exchequer
account and report about the same to the
concerned District Magistrate, who in turn
shall submit a report before Registrar
General, High Court of Judicature at
Allahabad, in respect of deposition of the
aforesaid draft. The District Magistrate,
Sambhal is further directed to ensure that
the
rest
compensation
amount
of
Rs.25,000/- is not released in favour of
opposite party no.2.

12. The aforesaid order has been
passed in the presence of learned counsel
for the applicants, learned counsel for the
1174 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
opposite party no.2 as well as learned
counsels for the State.

13. Learned counsel for the
applicants further submits that since the
parties have entered into compromise and
the opposite party no.2 has given his
statement before this Court that he does not
want to proceed with the case, the entire
proceedings of the aforesaid criminal case
may be quashed by this Court.

14. Learned A.G.A. for the State as
well as learned counsel for the opposite
party no.2 also accept that the parties have
entered into a compromise and they have
no objection, if the proceedings in the
aforesaid case are quashed.

15. This Court is not unmindful of
the following judgements of the Apex
Court:

(i). B.S. Joshi and others
Vs.
State
of
Haryana
and
Another; (2003)4 SCC 675,
(ii). Nikhil Merchant Vs.
Central Bureau of Investigation;
(2008) 9 SCC 677,
(iii). Manoj Sharma Vs.
State and Others; (2008) 16 SCC
1,
(iv). Gian Singh Vs. State
of Punjab; (2012); 10 SCC 303,
(v). Narindra Singh and
others Vs. State of Punjab; (
2014) 6 SCC 466,

16. In the aforesaid judgments, the
Apex Court has categorically held that
compromise can be made between the
parties even in respect of certain cognizable
and non compoundable offences. Reference
may also be made to the decision given by
this Court in Shaifullah and Others Vs.
State of U.P. & Another; 2013 (83) ACC
278 and Pramod & Another Vs. State of
U.P. & Another (Application U/S 482
No.12174 of 2020, decided on 23rd
February, 2021) and Daxaben Vs. State
of Gujarat, reported in 2022 SCC Online
SC 936 in which the law expounded by the
Apex court in the aforesaid cases has been
explained in detail.

17.

Given
the
facts
and
circumstances of the case, as outlined
above, and considering the submissions
made by counsel for both parties, the court
is of the considered opinion that prolonging
the proceedings in the aforementioned
criminal case would serve no useful
purpose, as the parties have already
resolved their dispute.

18. It is deeply concerning to
observe that, while adjudicating cases
under the jurisdiction of the Prevention of
Atrocities
Act
concerning
SC/ST
individuals,
this
Court
has
encountered
numerous
instances
where
false
and
exaggerated complaints are being filed for
financial gain. The Act, which was designed to
provide immediate relief to victims of atrocities,
is being misused by some individuals to obtain
compensation. The Court has identified several
cases where false FIRs were lodged with the
sole aim of securing such compensation. To
prevent this abuse, a rigorous verification
process must be implemented by the authorities
before the lodging of an FIR. However, even
with such mechanisms in place, if it is
discovered that a false FIR has been filed purely
for financial gain, the individuals responsible
should be held legally accountable. This would
serve as a deterrent against the misuse of the
Act for personal profit.

19. The weaponization and misuse
of provisions intended to protect vulnerable
9 All. Vihari & Ors. Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
1175
groups
who
have
historically
faced
discrimination not only undermines the
very spirit of these laws but also hampers
the progress toward genuine equality. When
legal safeguards are exploited for personal
or
financial
gain,
it
dilutes
their
effectiveness and erodes public trust in the
justice system. Such actions divert attention
and resources away from legitimate cases
where real victims need protection and
justice. Ultimately, this misuse threatens to
perpetuate inequality, as it distorts the
purpose of these protective measures,
which are crucial for addressing systemic
injustices and creating a truly equitable
society. For true equality to be realized,
these legal provisions must be applied with
integrity,
ensuring
they
serve
those
genuinely in need and not those seeking to
exploit the system for unjust gains.

20. While the SC/ST Act plays a
crucial role in safeguarding vulnerable
communities,
measures
must
be
implemented to ensure that compensation
relief funds are allocated efficiently and
fairly, preventing misuse and supporting
genuine victims. At the same time, to
maintain balance and deter the abuse of this
special legislation, courts should invoke the
legal recourse available under Section 182
of the I.P.C. to hold accountable those
individuals, who file false FIRs solely for
the purpose of securing compensation. This
will ensure that the integrity of the Act is
preserved while punishing those who
attempt to exploit it for personal gain.

21. The SC/ST Act is an essential
legal safeguard that provides critical
protection to historically disadvantaged and
marginalized communities. It serves as a
vital
tool
in
combating
entrenched
discrimination, ensuring that those who
have faced systemic injustices are afforded
legal recourse and relief. By addressing
atrocities and promoting social justice, the
Act
helps
bridge
the
gap
between
marginalized groups and the broader
society, advancing the cause of equality and
dignity for all. However, the exploitation of
this important provision for personal or
financial gain undermines its true purpose.
When the Act is misused, it creates
suspicion
and
skepticism
within
the
criminal justice system, eroding the trust of
both the public and the innocent individuals
who
are
genuinely
affected
by
discrimination.
Such
misuse
diverts
attention
away
from
real
victims,
weakening the effectiveness of the law and
casting doubt on the authenticity of future
claims. In the long run, this not only harms
the credibility of the justice system but also
hinders the progress toward achieving
genuine equality for those who continue to
face
prejudice
and
marginalization.
Maintaining the integrity of the SC/ST Act
is essential for preserving its role in
protecting the vulnerable and upholding
justice.

22. To effectively address the
misuse of the SC/ST Act and ensure that its
provisions are not exploited, several
measures should be implemented. First, a
thorough
pre-registration
verification
process should be established, requiring
law enforcement to assess the credibility of
complaints before filing FIRs. This could
involve mandatory mediation sessions,
where parties can attempt to resolve
disputes amicably before resorting to legal
action. Second, training programs should
be conducted for police officers and
judicial officials to help them recognize
signs of potential misuse and to ensure that
they approach cases with sensitivity and
awareness of the implications. Third, a
dedicated
oversight
body
could
be
1176 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
established to monitor complaints under the
SC/ST Act, investigating patterns of misuse
and providing recommendations for action.
Finally, public awareness campaigns should
be launched to educate communities about
the Act's purpose and the consequences of
filing false claims, thereby fostering a
culture of integrity and accountability.
These measures would not only help
safeguard the Act's integrity but also
support genuine victims in receiving the
justice they deserve.

23. In view of the statement given
by opposite party no.2 before this Court,
the proceeding of charge sheet dated
22.05.2022 as well as S.T. No.130 of 2022
(State vs. Vihari & Others), arising out of
Case Crime No.101/2022, under Sections
504, 506, 323 I.P.C. and Sections 3(1)da,
3(1)dha S.C./S.T. Act, Police Station- Kaila
Devi, District- Sambhal, pending before the
learned Additional District & Session
Judge/Special
Judge
(S.C./S.T.
Act),
Sambhal
at
Chandausi,
are
hereby
quashed.

24. The application is, accordingly,
allowed. There shall be no order as to
costs.

25. This order be placed before the
Registrar General of this Court for its
circulation
to
all
District
Courts
highlighting
the
observations,
made
hereinabove, who will pass orders, in such
cases, taking into consideration the reports
submitted by Investigating Officers under
Section 173(2) Cr.P.C., in accordance with
law and also keeping in mind the
provisions of Section 182 I.P.C.

26. A copy of this order be
communicated to learned Government
Advocate, High Court, Allahabad, who
shall send it to the Director General of
Police, U.P., for issuance of necessary
circular to the Police Authorities of the
Districts to consider the observations of the
Court with regard to invocation of the
provisions of Section 182 I.P.C. (now 217
of B.N.S. 2023).
----------
(2024) 9 ILRA 1176
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 20.09.2024

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SAMIT GOPAL, J.

Application U/S 482 No. 21392 of 2022
With
Application U/S 482 No. 37671 of 2022

Awadhesh Agarwal ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Aditya Prakash Singh, Sri Sushil Shukla

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Anil Kumar Srivastava (Sr. Adv.), G.A., Sri
Namit Srivastava, Sri Ram Bahadur, Sri Vikas
Srivastava

(A) Criminal Law - The Code of criminal
procedure, 1973 - Section 482 - Inherent
power, Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Section
307 - Attempt to murder, Section 34 -
Common
Intention,
Section
120-B
-
Criminal Conspiracy, The Code of criminal
procedure, 1973 - Section 161,164 - a
few bits here and a few bits there on
which the prosecution proposes to rely are
woefully inadequate for connecting the
accused with the crime. (Para - 11)

(B) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860 - law relating to conspiracy under
Section 120-B - importance of evidence
and
judicial
scrutiny
in
establishing
criminal conspiracy - High Court has the
power to assess the weight of material on