Allahabad High Court
NEHA AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
- Bench
- VIVEK VARMA
Holding
The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the applicants under Section 482 Cr.P.C. as the matter was a settled personal dispute with no criminal intent.
Summary
The applicants, a wife and her father‑in‑law, filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash criminal proceedings (including a charge‑sheet and cognizance order) filed under Sections 392, 504 and 506 IPC arising from a matrimonial dispute. They contended that the FIR was lodged out of misunderstanding, there was no criminal intent, no injury, and the parties have now settled their differences, filing a compromise deed verified by the trial court. The opposite party, represented by the same counsel, expressed no objection to quashing the case. The High Court, relying on the settled principle that Section 482 may be invoked to prevent abuse of process in personal disputes that have been amicably resolved, set aside the proceedings against the applicants. The application was allowed, resulting in the quashing of the criminal case.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can quash criminal proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. when the dispute is purely personal and the parties have reached a settlement.
- Whether the existence of a compromise deed and the consent of the complainant justify setting aside the FIR and charge‑sheet.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 392, 504, 506
Subjects
- Section 482 Cr.P.C.
- quash of criminal proceedings
- matrimonial dispute
- compromise deed
- abuse of process
- criminal intimidation
- robbery
- settlement
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 30153 of 2018
Neha And Another
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Mrityunjay Dwivedi, Shobha Vati
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ravi Prakash Singh
Court No. - 64
HON'BLE VIVEK VARMA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, Sri Anup Singh, Advocate
holding brief of Sri Ravi Prakash Singh, learned counsel for opposite
party no.2 and Sri N. K. Sharma, learned AGA for the State.
2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with
the prayer to quash the entire criminal proceedings as well as the charge-
sheet dated 09.04.2018 and cognizance order dated 25.05.2018 passed in
Crime No.0713 of 2017, under Sections 392, 504, 506 I.P.C., Police
Station Delhi Gate, District Aligarh.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that:-
(i) the dispute arises out of matrimonial discord. Applicant no.1 is the
wife, whereas applicant no.2 is the father-in-law.
(ii) the first information report came to be lodged by the opposite party
no. 2 owing to some misunderstanding and misgivings between the
parties and not on account of any real occurrence as alleged;
(iii) there never was any criminal intent on part of the applicants nor any
criminal offence as alleged had ever occurred;
(iv) there is no injury caused to any party and wholly exaggerated
allegations had been made in the heat of the moment owing to estranged
relationship and bruised egos;
(v) at present, the parties to the dispute, have resolved their differences
and have made peace;
(vi) therefore, in such changed circumstances, the opposite party no. 2
A482 No. 30153 of 2018
2
does not wish to press charges against the applicants.
4. It is further submitted that the parties have filed a compromise deed
before the court concerned. Pursuant to the order dated 09.04.2026 passed
by this Court, the parties appeared before the trial court, whereupon the
compromise was duly verified by order dated 13.04.2026. The copy of the
verification order dated 13.04.2026 has been sent to this Court by the In-
charge/ Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.06, Aligarh along
with her letter dated 05.05.2026.
5. Sri Anup Singh, Advocate holding brief of Sri Ravi Prakash Singh,
learned counsel for opposite party no.2 does not dispute the submissions
advanced by the counsel for the applicants or the correctness of the
documents relied upon by him. He submits that the opposite party no.2
has no objection if the proceedings of the aforesaid case are quashed.
6. In view of the fact that the dispute appears to be purely of a personal
nature being a matrimonial dispute that has been mutually settled between
the parties, to their satisfaction, no useful purpose would be served in
allowing such a prosecution to proceed any further.
7. Thus, in view of the well settled principles of law as laid down by the
Hon'ble Apex Court in B.S. Joshi v. State of Haryana, 2003(4) SCC 675
, as well as Nikhil Merchant v. Central Bureau of Investigation and
another, J.T., 2008 (9) SC 192, the proceedings of the aforesaid case, in
so far the applicants are concerned, are hereby set aside.
8. The present application is, accordingly, allowed.
(Vivek Varma, J.)
September 8, 2026
Abhishek
Digitally signed by :-
ABHISHEK SINGH
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…