Allahabad High Court

ABHISHEK PATHAK AND 7 OTHERSversusState of U.P. AND ANOTHER

Decided: 20 September 2026
Bench: CHAWAN PRAKASH

Holding

The High Court held that where the parties have settled their grievances, the criminal proceedings may be quashed under its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.

Summary

The applicants filed a petition under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash Criminal Case No. 34 of 2024, which involved charges under Sections 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354‑A of the IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. The matter was referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre, where the parties reached a compromise and submitted a report confirming settlement. Both the respondents and the State expressed no objection to the quashing of the proceedings. Relying on Supreme Court precedents that allow the High Court to exercise its inherent powers to dismiss criminal cases where the parties have settled their disputes, the Court held that the proceedings could be set aside. Consequently, the Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding against the applicants and allowed the application.

Issues considered

Whether a criminal proceeding can be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. on the basis of a settlement/compromise between the parties.
Whether the High Court has jurisdiction to set aside the charge‑sheet and the order of taking cognizance after a settlement has been effected.

Legislation cited

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
Dowry Prohibition Act — s. 3, 4
Indian Penal Code — s. 323, 354-A, 498A, 504, 506

Subjects

settlement
compromise
quash criminal proceedings
Section 482 Cr.P.C.
mediation
dowry prohibition
domestic violence
high court jurisdiction

Judgment

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 29588 of 2024

Abhishek Pathak And 7 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus

State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)

Counsel for Applicant(s) : Sunit Kumar, Yatish Kumar Dwivedi
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Vinay Kumar Mishra

Court No. - 83
HON'BLE CHAWAN PRAKASH, J.

1. Heard Mr. Yatish Kumar Dwivedi, learned Counsel for the applicants,
Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, learned Counsel for the opposite party no. 2
and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with
the following prayer:

"It is, therefore most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be
pleased to quash the entire proceeding of Criminal Case No. 34 of 2024 (State Vs.
Abhishek Pathak and others), Under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506, I.P.C., and 3/4 D.P.
Act in respect of the Applicant No.1 to 7 and Under Section 498A, 323, 504, 506, 354-
A I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act in respect of the Applicant No.8, arising out of case crime
no. 07 of 2024, Police Station- Mahila Thana, District-Jalaun pending in the court of
Judicial Magistrate, Jalaun at Orai to quash the impugned charge-sheet dated
10.04.2024 submitted in the aforesaid case and also quash the impugned order of
taking cognizance dated 04.06.2024 and summoning the applicants passed by the
Learned Judicial Magistrate Jalaun at Orai."

3. This Court, vide order dated 29.05.2024, referred the matter before the
Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Allahabad with the
direction that the applicants shall deposit a sum of Rs. 30,000/- at the
Mediation Centre.

4. Learned Counsel for the applicants submits that the mediation
succeeded. The parties before this Court had made a request that they
A482 No. 29588 of 2024
2

have entered into a compromise in this matter and have settled all the
disputes between them and now they do not want to proceed with this
matter.

5. As per report dated 27.05.2025 of Mediation Centre, parties have
entered into compromise.

6. Learned Counsel for the opposite party no.2 submits that he has no
objection if the impugned proceedings pending against the applicants is
quashed.

7. The law with regards to quashing of a case on the basis of settlement
arrived between the parties, is well settled. The Apex Court in the cases of
(1) B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and another: (2003)4
SCC 675; (2) Nikhil Merchant Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation :
(2008) 9 SCC 677; (3) Manoj Sharma Vs. State and others: ( 2008) 16
SCC 1; (4) Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab: (2012) 10 SCC 303; (5)
Shaifullah and others Vs. State of U.P. And another: 2013 (83) ACC
278 and (6) Parbatbhai Ahir@Parbatbhai @ Bhimsinbhai Karmur
and others Vs. State of Gujarat and another: (2017) 9 SCC 641 has
held that the cases in which the parties have settled their grievances can
be quashed.

8. From perusal of the records and the law laid down by the Apex Court
on the subject matter, the present case is a good case for exercising
powers by this Court to quash the proceedings as prayed for by the
applicants.

9. The entire proceedings of the aforesaid case with regard to the present
applicants are hereby quashed.

10. The present application is allowed.

(Chawan Prakash,J.)
September 21, 2026
Vijay

Digitally signed by :-
VIJAY KUMAR SAHU
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…