Allahabad High Court
ANIKET DIXIT @ NANDU AND 8 OTHERSversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER
- Decided
Holding
The High Court quashed the entire criminal proceeding on account of the parties' amicable settlement, relying on Section 482 CrPC and Supreme Court jurisprudence.
Summary
The applicants and the State entered into an amicable settlement regarding offences under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 and 427 IPC arising from Crime No. 4931 of 2017. They filed a compromise application before the trial court, which was verified and reported to the High Court. Relying on Section 482 of the CrPC and a series of Supreme Court decisions, the High Court examined whether the pending criminal case could be quashed on the basis of the compromise. The Court held that the settlement justified quashing the entire proceeding. Consequently, the application under Section 482 was allowed and the criminal case was dismissed.
Issues considered
- Can a criminal proceeding under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506 and 427 IPC be quashed on the ground of a compromise between the parties?
- Does the High Court have jurisdiction under Section 482 CrPC to set aside a criminal case in view of Supreme Court precedents on settlement and compromise?
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 482
- Indian Penal Code — s. 147, 323, 427, 452, 504, 506
Subjects
- compromise
- quash
- criminal proceedings
- Section 482 CrPC
- non‑compoundable offences
- settlement
- High Court
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 32709 of 2023
Aniket Dixit @ Nandu And 8 Others
.....Applicant(s)
Versus
State of U.P. and Another
.....Opposite
Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s) : Purushottam Pandey
Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Rajesh Kumar Mishra
Court No. - 77
HON'BLE PRAVEEN KUMAR GIRI, J.
1. Heard Sri Purushottam Pandey, learned counsel for the applicants and Sri
Rajesh Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for O.P. No.2.
2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that he has filed the instant
application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the relief which has been
mentioned in the prayer clause of the application.
3. The relief which has been mentioned in the application is delineated
below:-
"It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may
graciously be pleased to allow this application and quash the entire
proceeding of the case no.1317 of 2019 ( State Vs. Aniket @ Nandu and
others) arising out of Case Crime No.4931 of 2017, under Sections 147,
452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District Shahjahanpur
pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shahjahanpur and
charge sheet dated 28.01.2018, ( on the basis of the compromise done
between the parties).
It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay
the further proceedings of Case No.1317 of 2019 ( State Vs. Aniket @
Nandu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.4931 of 2017, under
Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District
Shahjahanpur pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Shahjahanpur ( on the basis of the compromise done between the parties),
during the pendency of the present application before this Hon'ble Court.
And/or pass such other and further order, which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."
A482 No. 32709 of 2023
2
4.The parties, out of their own free will, have settled their dispute amicably
and in furtherance thereof, they have filed a compromise application dated
15.09.2022 before this Court. Thereafter, this Court, vide order 21.12.2023,
has directed the parties to appear before the concerned trial court for
verification of the compromise application with a direction to the trial court
to verify the compromise application in presence of both the parties and
submit a report to this Court.
5. Learned counsel for the parties have not disputed the fact that the parties
have settled their dispute amicably and they have filed compromise
application before the trial court, which has been verified by the trial Court,
vide order dated 12.01.2024, A certified copy whereof has been annexed on
page no.9 of supplementary affidavit dated 20.03.2024, which is kept on
record.
6. In the present case, the sections involved are Section 147, 452, 323, 504,
506, 427 I.P.C.
7. Learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 has submitted that the O.P.
No.2 does not want to proceed with the impugned criminal proceedings.
8. Therefore, in view of the above and considering the dictum of the Apex
Court in re: B.S. Joshi and others Vs. State of Haryana and Another;
2003 (4) SCC 675, Gian Singh vs. State of Punjab (2012) 10 SCC 303;
State of Rajasthan vs. Shambhu Kewat, (2014) 4 SCC 149; State of
Madhya Pradesh vs. Deepak (2014) 10 SCC 285; State of Madhya
Pradesh vs. Manish (2015) 8 SCC 307; J.Ramesh Kamath vs. Mohana
Kurup (2016) 12 SCC 179; State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rajveer Singh
(2016) 12 SCC 471 and Parbatbhai Ahir vs. State of Gujarat (2017) 9
SCC 641, the entire proceedings of Criminal Case 1317 of 2019 ( State Vs.
Aniket @ Nandu and others) arising out of Case Crime No.4931 of 2017,
under Sections 147, 452, 323, 504, 506, 427 I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali, District
Shahjahanpur pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Shahjahanpur and charge sheet dated 28.01.2018 are hereby quashed.
9. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed.
March 18, 2026
SFH
(Praveen Kumar Giri,J.)
Digitally signed by :-
SYED FAHIM HUSAIN
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…