Allahabad High Court
NAVEEN KUMAR JAIN AND 13 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- VIKRAM D CHAUHAN
Holding
The criminal proceedings were quashed as the parties had settled the dispute, making further trial futile and an abuse of process.
Summary
The petitioners sought quashing of a cognizance order and pending criminal case arising from a commercial dispute, alleging that the parties had entered into a settlement on 19 June 2019, which was verified by the court on 10 December 2024. The respondent and the Attorney General did not contest the existence of the settlement and expressed willingness to end the criminal proceedings. The High Court observed that the dispute was essentially commercial, the settlement eliminated any prospect of conviction, and continuing the trial would be futile and an abuse of process. Relying on established Supreme Court precedents, the Court held that it was in the interest of justice to terminate the criminal case. Consequently, the petition was allowed and the proceedings were quashed.
Issues considered
- Whether criminal proceedings arising from a commercial dispute can be quashed on the ground of a settlement/compromise between the parties.
- Whether continuation of such proceedings would constitute an abuse of process and be contrary to the interest of justice.
Subjects
- settlement
- compromise
- quash criminal proceedings
- abuse of process
- commercial dispute
- Article 227
- High Court
- criminal law
- futility of trial
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 8054 of 2016
Naveen Kumar Jain And 13 Others
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Anoop Trivedi, Anoop Trivedi (Senior
Adv.), Mohd. Saleem Khan
Counsel for Respondent(s) : Arpit Khanna, G.A., Swetashwa
Agarwal
Court No. - 55
HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Utkarsh Kharwar, Advocate holding brief of Sri Mohd.
Saleem Khan, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri Arpit Khanna,
learned counsel for the respondent no.2 and learned A.G.A. for the State.
2. Th present petition has been filed for quashing the cognizance order
dated 12.9.2016 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court
No.5, Meerut as well as Case No.5305 of 2016 pending in the court of
Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.5, Meerut.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the compromise has
already been entered between the parties on 19.6.2019 and the same has
been verified by the court concerned on 10.12.2024, therefore, the present
case be finally decided.
4. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 has not disputed the facts as stated
by learned counsel for the petitioners. He further contended that
respondent no.2 does not want to proceed with the criminal case against
the petitioners and the same may be quashed.
5. Learned AGA does not dispute the fact that parties have entered into
settlement which is duly verified by the court concerned. It is further
submitted that he would have no objection in case criminal proceedings
are put to an end. He further submits that in view of settlement there is
virtually no chance of any conviction being recorded in the criminal
A227 No. 8054 of 2016
2
proceedings.
6. Having examined the matter in its totality, this Court is of the view that
the criminal proceedings in the present case had essentially been an
outcome of a commercial dispute; and there are no such over bearing
circumstances for which the applicants ought to be prosecuted even after
the parties has entered into a settlement. Needless to observe that with the
present stand of the parties in terms of their settlement, there is practically
no chance of recording conviction, even if the case under the F.I.R. in
question is put to trial. In other words, entire exercise of trial would only
be an exercise in futility. On the contrary, looking to the nature of dispute
and the fact that the disputants have compromised and want to proceed
peacefully ahead, it would be in the interest of justice that criminal
proceedings in question are quashed.
7. It would be unfair or contrary to the interest of justice to continue with
the criminal proceeding or continuation of the criminal proceeding would
tantamount to abuse of process of law despite settlement and compromise
between the victim and the wrongdoer and to secure the ends of justice, it
is appropriate that the criminal case is put to an end.
8. In view of the fact that the parties do not want to pursue the case any
further as stated by them and the fact that matter has been mutually settled
between the parties in view of the compromise dated 19.6.2019, no useful
purpose would be served in proceeding with the matter further.
9. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in Parbatbhai Aahir Vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9
SCC 641, Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303 and State
of M.P. Vs. Laxmi Narayan, (2019) 5 SCC 688, the proceedings of the
aforesaid case is hereby quashed.
10. The present petition is, accordingly, allowed.
(Vikram D. Chauhan,J.)
September 11, 2026
Bhaskar
Digitally signed by :-
BHASKAR
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…